Re: We shouldn't signal process groups with SIGQUIT

On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 04:20:59PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2023-02-14 14:23:32 -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 12:47:12PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
>> > Not really related: I do wonder how often we end up self deadlocking in
>> > quickdie(), due to the ereport() not beeing reentrant. We'll "fix" it soon
>> > after, due to postmasters SIGKILL. Perhaps we should turn on
>> > send_abort_for_kill on CI?
>>
>> +1, this seems like it'd be useful in general. I'm guessing this will
>> require a bit of work on the CI side to generate the backtrace.
>
> They're already generated for all current platforms. It's possible that debug
> info for some system libraries is missing, but the most important one (like
> libc) should be available.
>
> Since yesterday the cfbot website allows to easily find the coredumps, too:
> http://cfbot.cputube.org/highlights/core-7.html

Oh, that's nifty. Any reason not to enable send_abort_for_crash, too?

> There's definitely some work to be done to make the contents of the backtraces
> more useful though. E.g. printing out the program name, the current directory
> (although that doesn't seem to be doable for all programs). For everything but
> windows that's in src/tools/ci/cores_backtrace.sh.

Got it, thanks for the info.

--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com