On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> And while we're on the subject ... isn't bgworker_die() utterly and
>> completely broken? That unconditional elog(FATAL) means that no process
>> using that handler can do anything remotely interesting, like say touch
>> shared memory.
>
> Yeah, but for the record (since I see I got cc'd here), that's not my
> fault. I moved it into bgworker.c, but it's been like that since
> Alvaro's original commit of the bgworker facility
> (da07a1e856511dca59cbb1357616e26baa64428e).
Is this an edge case or something that will hit a lot of users?
Arbitrary server panics seems pretty serious...
merlin