Re: Non-robustness in pmsignal.c
От
Tom Lane
Тема
Re: Non-robustness in pmsignal.c
Дата
Msg-id
3443537.1665190158@sss.pgh.pa.us
Ответ на
Re: Non-robustness in pmsignal.c (Andres Freund)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Non-robustness in pmsignal.c Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Non-robustness in pmsignal.c Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: Non-robustness in pmsignal.c Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Non-robustness in pmsignal.c Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: Non-robustness in pmsignal.c Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Non-robustness in pmsignal.c Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Non-robustness in pmsignal.c Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: Non-robustness in pmsignal.c Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Andres Freund writes: > On 2022-10-07 20:35:58 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Andres Freund writes: >>> Why are we even tracking PM_CHILD_UNUSED / PM_CHILD_ASSIGNED in shared memory? >> Because those flags are set by the child processes too, cf >> MarkPostmasterChildActive and MarkPostmasterChildInactive. > Only PM_CHILD_ACTIVE and PM_CHILD_WALSENDER though. We could afford another > MaxLivePostmasterChildren() sized array... Oh, I see what you mean --- one private and one public array. Maybe that makes more sense than what I did, not sure. >> I am, but I'm not inclined to push this immediately before a wrap. > +1 OK, I'll take a little more time on this and maybe code it up as you suggest. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления