Re: [HACKERS] parallel.c oblivion of worker-startup failures - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: [HACKERS] parallel.c oblivion of worker-startup failures
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1+87DECjb0r16YJJtgZ72_OioPpmTWWgRzvfrsC11uLJg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] parallel.c oblivion of worker-startup failures  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] parallel.c oblivion of worker-startup failures  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 11:27 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 11:07 PM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Okay, see the attached and let me know if that suffices the need?
>
> +             * Check for unexpected worker death.  This will ensure that if
> +             * the postmaster failed to start the worker, then we don't wait
> +             * for it indefinitely.  For workers that are known to be
> +             * launched, we can rely on their error queue being freed once
> +             * they exit.
>
> Hmm.  Is this really true?  What if the worker starts up but then
> crashes before attaching to the error queue?
>

If the worker errored out before attaching to the error queue, then we
can't rely on error queue being freed.  However, in that case, the
worker status will be BGWH_STOPPED.  I have adjusted the comment
accordingly.

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table
Next
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #14941: Vacuum crashes