| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, "Adam, Etienne (Nokia-TECH/Issy Les Moulineaux)" <etienne(dot)adam(at)nokia(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Bugs <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Duquesne, Pierre (Nokia-TECH/Issy Les Moulineaux)" <pierre(dot)duquesne(at)nokia(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] [postgresql 10 beta3] unrecognized node type: 90 |
| Date: | 2017-08-30 11:39:34 |
| Message-ID: | 23961.1504093174@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 10:05 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> ! /* Make sure any existing workers are gracefully shut down */
> ExecShutdownGatherWorkers(node);
> The above call doesn't ensure the shutdown. It just ensures that we
> receive all messages from parallel workers. Basically, it doesn't
> call WaitForParallelWorkersToExit.
Perhaps you should submit a patch to rename ExecShutdownGatherWorkers
to something less misleading, then. But the previous comment there
was even more wrong :-(
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2017-08-30 11:50:23 | Re: [HACKERS] [postgresql 10 beta3] unrecognized node type: 90 |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2017-08-30 10:27:55 | Re: [HACKERS] [postgresql 10 beta3] unrecognized node type: 90 |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2017-08-30 11:41:18 | Re: Parallel worker error |
| Previous Message | David Steele | 2017-08-30 11:02:35 | Re: Update low-level backup documentation to match actual behavior |