Re: Unportable implementation of background worker start

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: remi_zara(at)mac(dot)com
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, cm(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Unportable implementation of background worker start
Date: 2017-04-24 23:47:09
Message-ID: 13085.1493077629@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I wrote:
> What I'm inclined to do is to revert the pselect change but not the other,
> to see if that fixes these two animals. If it does, we could look into
> blacklisting these particular platforms when choosing pselect.

It looks like coypu is going to need manual intervention (ie, kill -9
on the leftover postmaster) to get unwedged :-(. That's particularly
disturbing because it implies that ServerLoop isn't iterating at all;
otherwise, it'd have noticed by now that the buildfarm script deleted
its data directory out from under it. Even if NetBSD's pselect had
forgotten to unblock signals, you'd figure it'd time out after a
minute ... so it's even more broken than that.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Craig Ringer 2017-04-24 23:55:53 Re: OK, so culicidae is *still* broken
Previous Message Andres Freund 2017-04-24 23:25:59 Re: walsender & parallelism