On 6/2/17 15:41, Tom Lane wrote:
> It's certainly plausible that we could have the latch code just ignore
> WL_POSTMASTER_DEATH if not IsUnderPostmaster. I think that the original
> reasoning for not doing that was that the calling code should know which
> environment it's in, and not pass an unimplementable wait-exit reason;
> so silently ignoring the bit could mask a bug. Perhaps that argument is
> no longer attractive. Alternatively, we could fix the relevant call sites
> to do "(IsUnderPostmaster ? WL_POSTMASTER_DEATH : 0)", and keep the strict
> behavior for the majority of call sites.
There are a lot of those call sites. (And a lot of duplicate code for
what to do if postmaster death actually happens.) I doubt we want to
check them all.
The attached patch fixes the reported issue for me.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers