Re: BUG #17073: docs - "Improve signal handling reliability" - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From David G. Johnston
Subject Re: BUG #17073: docs - "Improve signal handling reliability"
Date
Msg-id CAKFQuwbxrx5YnRniPBCkVb4hA12gQES0GNPofDN03L5gHzZN7g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: BUG #17073: docs - "Improve signal handling reliability"  (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>)
Responses Re: BUG #17073: docs - "Improve signal handling reliability"  (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>)
Re: BUG #17073: docs - "Improve signal handling reliability"  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>)
List pgsql-bugs
On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 5:54 PM Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> wrote:
On 2021/06/29 10:02, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 02:11:57AM +0000, PG Bug reporting form wrote:
>> The following bug has been logged on the website:
>>
>> Bug reference:      17073
>> Logged by:          Andrey Lizenko
>> Email address:      lizenko79@gmail.com
>> PostgreSQL version: 14beta2
>> Operating system:   any
>> Description:
>>
>> Looks like description was missed or corrupted for the following release
>> note:
>> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/14/release-14.html
>>
>> Improve signal handling reliability (Fujii Masao)
>> GENERAL ENOUGH?
>
> It means I am not clear if this text is accurate or needs improvement.

Since this explains the commit 2945a488a, it's better to describe
something like the following?

     Make the standby handle signal promptly.

     Previously there was the case where the standby could not promptly
     handle the signal like shutdown request received while waiting on
     wal_retrieve_retry_interval.

The wording still needs some work...but is this even release note worthy?

We forget to check for interrupts before sleeping in an otherwise busy-wait loop.  We corrected the oversight.

Otherwise, "The standby startup process now promptly handles interrupts."

Most of what I'm reading says this only impacted the startup of the standby process; normal operations already worked correctly.  Is that correct?

David J.

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Manay Zurita Henri Wladimir
Date:
Subject: Postregres-9.3 redhad 7
Next
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #17073: docs - "Improve signal handling reliability"