Re: get_controlfile() can leak fds in the backend
| От | Fabien COELHO |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: get_controlfile() can leak fds in the backend |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | alpine.DEB.2.21.1902280946060.7815@lancre обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: get_controlfile() can leak fds in the backend (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
| Ответы |
Re: get_controlfile() can leak fds in the backend
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hello Andres, >> Note that my concern is not about the page size, but rather that as more >> commands may change the cluster status by editing the control file, it would >> be better that a postmaster does not start while a pg_rewind or enable >> checksum or whatever is in progress, and currently there is a possible race >> condition between the read and write that can induce an issue, at least >> theoretically. > > Seems odd to bring this up in this thread, it really has nothing to do > with the topic. Indeed. I raised it here because it is in the same area of code and Michaël was looking at it. > If we were to want to do more here, ISTM the right approach would use > the postmaster pid file, not the control file. ISTM that this just means re-inventing a manual poor-featured race-condition-prone lock API around another file, which seems to be created more or less only by "pg_ctl", while some other commands use the control file (eg pg_rewind, AFAICS). -- Fabien.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: