| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: possible bug not in open items |
| Date: | 2009-04-10 21:29:01 |
| Message-ID: | 1239398941.6307.4.camel@dell.linuxdev.us.dell.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Fri, 2009-04-10 at 14:47 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> This patch is so wrong that it's scary. You can't have
> ImmediateInterruptOK true over the duration of any significant amount of
> backend processing --- as an example, if you take control away in the
> middle of a malloc call, you'll probably be left with a corrupt malloc
> arena.
>
Thank you for the explanation. My initial thinking was that either
DoingCommandRead would protect us (for SIGINT to the backend), or we
were going to terminate the process anyway (for SIGTERM). But it sounds
like it leaves us in a state so unsafe that we can't even abort the
transaction nicely.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-04-10 22:04:02 | Re: possible bug not in open items |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-04-10 21:24:17 | Re: Re: [BUGS] BUG #4027: backslash escapingnotdisabledinplpgsql |