Re: atexit_callback can be a net negative

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>
Cc: Florian Weimer <fweimer(at)redhat(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: atexit_callback can be a net negative
Date: 2014-03-07 14:57:14
Message-ID: 14684.1394204234@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> writes:
> On 03/07/2014 04:23 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> There's the PID reuse problem. Forking twice (with a delay) could end
>> up with the same PID as MyProcPid.

> Not if the parent process is still running.

If the original parent backend is *not* still running, then running
atexit_callback in the grandchild is just as dangerous if not more so;
it could be clobbering shared-memory state belonging to some other
session that has recycled the same PGPROC.

I think Florian's right that there's a risk there, but it seems pretty
remote, and I don't see any reliable way to detect the case anyhow.
(Process start time? Where would you get that from portably?)
It's not a reason not to do something about the much larger chance of
this happening in a direct child process, which certainly won't have a
matching PID.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Florian Weimer 2014-03-07 15:02:17 Re: atexit_callback can be a net negative
Previous Message Tom Lane 2014-03-07 14:49:05 Re: atexit_callback can be a net negative