Re: Problem while setting the fpw with SIGHUP - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: Problem while setting the fpw with SIGHUP
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1Kbjjwq3BCfVuNcr7oph4b0kvf7YyEwTF+6v_KytrBgaA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Problem while setting the fpw with SIGHUP  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: Problem while setting the fpw with SIGHUP  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Re: Problem while setting the fpw with SIGHUP  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 10:34 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 10:03:59AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > I think, in this case, it might be advisable to just fix the problem
> > (a) which is what has been reported originally in the thread and
> > AFAICS, the fix for that is clear as compared to the problem (b).  If
> > you agree, then we can discuss what is the best fix for the first
> > problem (a).
>
> Okay, thanks for the input.  The fix for (a) would be in my opinion to
> just move the call to RecoveryInProgress() out of the critical section,
> then save the result into a variable, and use the variable within the
> critical section to avoid the potential palloc() problems.  What do you
> think?
>

Your proposed solution makes sense to me.  IIUC, this is quite similar
to what Dilip has also proposed [1].

[1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAFiTN-u4BA8KXcQUWDPNgaKAjDXC%3DC2whnzBM8TAcv%3DstckYUw%40mail.gmail.com

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


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Madeleine Thompson
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #15307: Low numerical precision of (Co-) Variance
Next
From: Gilles Darold
Date:
Subject: Ora2Pg v19.1 has been released