Re: Rethinking placement of latch self-pipe initialization - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Rethinking placement of latch self-pipe initialization
Date
Msg-id 29911.1349704455@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Rethinking placement of latch self-pipe initialization  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> We still have to consider how Postgres would operate without the
> latches. I don't see that it can, so a shutdown seems appropriate. Is
> the purpose of this just to allow a cleaner and more informative
> shutdown? Or do you think we can avoid?

The point is that right now, if a new backend fails its initialization
at this specific step, that gets translated into a database-wide crash
and restart cycle, for no good reason.  It should just result in that
particular session failing.

> If we did move the init calls, would that alter things for code that
> creates new used defined latches?

Only to the extent that it'd have to make sure it called the
initialization function at some appropriate point.  It's not like
required initialization functions are a foreign concept in our code.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Disable _FORTIFY_SOURCE with ICC
Next
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: enhanced error fields