| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Lakshmi Narayana Velayudam <dev(dot)narayana(dot)v(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Usage of ProcessConfigfile in SIGHUP_Handler |
| Date: | 2024-08-22 16:20:24 |
| Message-ID: | 2033295.1724343624@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Lakshmi Narayana Velayudam <dev(dot)narayana(dot)v(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> My Bad Nathan, was looking at PG 11, 14 codes. Just to be sure, calling
> *ProcessConfigFile *is a bug from a signal handler is a bug, right?
No, it was not. The previous postmaster coding blocked signals
everywhere except immediately around the main loop's select() call,
so there wasn't any real hazard of signal handlers interrupting
anything of concern. We redid it for cleanliness, not because there
was any observable bug.
(If there had been a bug there, ProcessConfigFile would have been
the least of our problems, because all the other postmaster signals
were handled in the same style.)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2024-08-22 16:33:27 | Re: Add SPLIT PARTITION/MERGE PARTITIONS commands |
| Previous Message | Amonson, Paul D | 2024-08-22 16:19:20 | RE: Proposal for Updating CRC32C with AVX-512 Algorithm. |