On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 01:18:56PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> What I'd be inclined to do after a failure is tear down the entire
> segment. Even if there's no mechanism to retry, you're saving the
> memory that the segment would have consumed.
Unpinning/detaching the segment/DSA/dshash table and deleting the DSM
registry entry in a PG_CATCH block scares me a little, but it might be
doable.
> Or maybe that's all too complicated for too little utility. I'm not sure.
That's ultimately where I landed.
> My perception is that this is setting a significantly lower standard for
> error tolerance than what we typically seek to achieve, but sometimes my
> perceptions are wrong, and sometimes better options are hard to come by.
Another thing that might be subconsciously guiding my decisions here is the
existing behavior when a shmem request/startup hook ERRORs (server startup
fails). I'd expect DSM registry users to be doing similar things in their
initialization callbacks, and AFAIK this behavior hasn't been a source of
complaints.
--
nathan
