On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 at 11:13, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 4:52 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >> But I'm of the opinion that proc_exit
> >> is the wrong thing to use after seeing postmaster death, critical
> >> section or no. We should assume that system integrity is already
> >> compromised, and get out as fast as we can with as few side-effects
> >> as possible. It'll be up to the next generation of postmaster to
> >> try to clean up.
>
> > Then wouldn't backends blocked in LWLockAcquire(x) hang forever, after
> > someone who holds x calls _exit()?
>
> If someone who holds x is killed by (say) the OOM killer, how do
> we get out of that?
+1, if we kill-9 PM and then immediately kill-9 lwlock holder, there
is no way for system to shutdown (both HEAD and back branches).
So we can ignore this case.
--
Best regards,
Kirill Reshke
