Re: Inconsistent behavior of smart shutdown handling for queries with and without parallel workers - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bharath Rupireddy
Subject Re: Inconsistent behavior of smart shutdown handling for queries with and without parallel workers
Date
Msg-id CALj2ACUxk6f9Z4K2Pb7NEeMo_Rj4GM4HPs1yJpOhHxrAJRN_5A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Inconsistent behavior of smart shutdown handling for queries with and without parallel workers  (Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Inconsistent behavior of smart shutdown handling for queries with and without parallel workers  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
I think the inconsistent behaviour reported in this thread gets
resolved with the approach and patch being discussed in [1].

>
> 1. In general, do we need to allow postmaster to send different
> signals to bgworkers for fast and smart shutdowns and let them
> differentiate the two modes(if needed)?
>

Is there any way the bgworkers(for that matter, any postmaster's child
process) knowing that there's a smart shutdown pending? This is
useful, if any of the bgworker(if not parallel workers) want to
differentiate the two modes i.e. smart and fast shutdown modes and
smartly finish of their work.

[1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/469199.1597337108%40sss.pgh.pa.us

With Regards,
Bharath Rupireddy.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: doc examples for pghandler
Next
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: Parallel query hangs after a smart shutdown is issued