Re: Printing backtrace of postgres processes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Fujii Masao
Subject Re: Printing backtrace of postgres processes
Date
Msg-id 850fa46c-73b8-47cb-901a-090ef036a741@oss.nttdata.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Printing backtrace of postgres processes  (torikoshia <torikoshia@oss.nttdata.com>)
Responses Re: Printing backtrace of postgres processes
List pgsql-hackers

On 2022/01/24 16:35, torikoshia wrote:
> On 2022-01-14 19:48, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 11:50 AM Bharath Rupireddy
>> <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 4:07 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > The Attached v15 patch has the fixes for the same.
>>>
>>> Thanks. The v15 patch LGTM and the cf bot is happy hence marking it as RfC.
>>
>> The patch was not applying because of the recent commit [1]. I took
>> this opportunity and tried a bunch of things without modifying the
>> core logic of the pg_log_backtrace feature that Vignesh has worked on.

I have one question about this feature. When the PID of auxiliary process like archiver is specified, probably the
functionalways reports the same result, doesn't it? Because, for example, the archiver always logs its backtrace in
HandlePgArchInterrupts().

Regards,

-- 
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: makefiles writing to $@ should first write to $@.new
Next
From: samay sharma
Date:
Subject: Re: Error running configure on Mac