Re: Sync Rep v19 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Fujii Masao
Subject Re: Sync Rep v19
Date
Msg-id AANLkTinpg4MW6wdsKU2FkQ=rN8K2T_92s8ec-i5Ry=+b@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Sync Rep v19  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Sync Rep v19
Re: Sync Rep v19
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:21 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> I've added code to shmqueue.c to allow this.
>
> New version pushed.

New comments;

It looks odd to report the sync_state of walsender in BACKUP
state as ASYNC.

+SyncRepCleanupAtProcExit(int code, Datum arg)
+{
+    if (WaitingForSyncRep && !SHMQueueIsDetached(&(MyProc->syncrep_links)))
+    {
+        LWLockAcquire(SyncRepLock, LW_EXCLUSIVE);
+        SHMQueueDelete(&(MyProc->syncrep_links));
+        LWLockRelease(SyncRepLock);
+    }
+
+    if (MyProc != NULL)
+        DisownLatch(&MyProc->waitLatch);

Can MyProc really be NULL here? If yes, "MyProc != NULL" should be
checked before seeing MyProc->syncrep_links.

Even though postmaster dies, the waiting backend keeps waiting until
the timeout expires. Instead, the backends should periodically check
whether postmaster is alive, and then they should exit immediately
if it's not alive, as well as other process does? If the timeout is
disabled, such backends would get stuck infinitely.

Though I commented about the issue related to shutdown, that was
pointless. So change of ProcessInterrupts is not required unless we
find the need again. Sorry for the noise..

Regards,

-- 
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andy Colson
Date:
Subject: Re: Alpha4 release blockers (was Re: wrapping up this CommitFest)
Next
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: Sync Rep v19