Re: DSM robustness failure (was Re: Peripatus/failures)

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Thomas Munro
Тема Re: DSM robustness failure (was Re: Peripatus/failures)
Дата
Msg-id CAEepm=21SZdv0m_z5x0WnoKNjdBmwF6VhY3bN3L-RkTtgT6bxw@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: DSM robustness failure (was Re: Peripatus/failures)  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>)
Ответы Re: DSM robustness failure (was Re: Peripatus/failures)
Re: DSM robustness failure (was Re: Peripatus/failures)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 9:43 AM Thomas Munro
<thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 9:00 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > I would argue that both dsm_postmaster_shutdown and dsm_postmaster_startup
> > are broken here; the former because it makes no attempt to unmap
> > the old control segment (which it oughta be able to do no matter how badly
> > broken the contents are), and the latter because it should not let
> > garbage old state prevent it from establishing a valid new segment.
>
> Looking.

(CCing Amit Kapila)

To reproduce this, I attached lldb to a backend and did "mem write
&dsm_control->magic 42", and then delivered SIGKILL to the backend.
Here's one way to fix it.  I think we have no choice but to leak the
referenced segments, but we can free the control segment.  See
comments in the attached patch for rationale.

-- 
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com

Вложения

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Peter Eisentraut
Дата:
Сообщение: pg_stat_ssl additions
Следующее
От: Andrew Dunstan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: MSVC compilers complain about snprintf