From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Ian Lance Taylor <ian(at)airs(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Re: [SQL] PostgreSQL crashes on me :( |
Date: | 2000-12-18 18:18:26 |
Message-ID: | 20256.977163506@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql |
Ian Lance Taylor <ian(at)airs(dot)com> writes:
> Any thoughts on a cleaner solution?
> One way to avoid this race condition is to set a timeout on the
> select. What is the maximum acceptable time for a timely response?
I thought about that, but it doesn't seem like a cleaner solution.
Basically you'd have to figure a tradeoff between wasted cycles in
the postmaster and time delay to respond to a crashed backend.
And there's no good tradeoff there. If you have a backend crash,
you want to shut down the other backends ASAP, before they have a
chance to propagate any shared-memory corruption that the failed
backend might've created. The entire exercise is probably pointless
if the postmaster twiddles its thumbs for awhile before killing the
other backends.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ian Lance Taylor | 2000-12-18 18:40:19 | Re: Re: [SQL] PostgreSQL crashes on me :( |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-12-18 18:03:34 | Re: Re: [HACKERS] 7.1 features list |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ian Lance Taylor | 2000-12-18 18:40:19 | Re: Re: [SQL] PostgreSQL crashes on me :( |
Previous Message | Ian Lance Taylor | 2000-12-18 17:58:02 | Re: Re: [SQL] PostgreSQL crashes on me :( |