Re: [HACKERS] possible self-deadlock window after bad ProcessStartupPacket - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] possible self-deadlock window after bad ProcessStartupPacket
Date
Msg-id 23818.1532030641@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] possible self-deadlock window after badProcessStartupPacket  (Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] possible self-deadlock window after badProcessStartupPacket  (Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> writes:
> What I'd do is have a volatile sig_atomic_t in_signal_handler_context
> variable to indicate that we're dying, and then when that is non-zero,
> ereport() and friends could use all-async-signal-safe codepaths.

I eagerly await your patch with an async-safe implementation of ereport...

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Nico Williams
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] possible self-deadlock window after badProcessStartupPacket
Next
From: Nico Williams
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] possible self-deadlock window after badProcessStartupPacket