From: | Thunder <thunder1(at)126(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Michael Paquier" <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Kuntal Ghosh" <kuntalghosh(dot)2007(at)gmail(dot)com>, "PostgreSQL Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re:Re: PANIC :Call AbortTransaction when transaction id is no normal |
Date: | 2019-05-14 02:56:04 |
Message-ID: | 4d8688e8.2ed3.16ab444bc37.Coremail.thunder1@126.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On our server when process crash and core dump file generated we will receive complaining phone call.
That's why i try to fix it.
At 2019-05-14 07:53:36, "Michael Paquier" <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 09:37:32AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> But ... that code's been like that for decades and nobody's complained
>> before. Why are we worried about bootstrap's response to signals at all?
>
>Yeah, I don't think that it is something worth bothering either. As
>you mentioned the data folder would be removed by default. Or perhaps
>the reporter has another case in mind which could justify a change in
>the signal handlers? I am ready to hear that case, but there is
>nothing about the reason why it could be a benefit.
>
>The patch proposed upthread is not something I find correct anyway,
>I'd rather have the abort path complain loudly about a bootstrap
>transaction that fails instead of just ignoring it, because it is the
>kind of transaction which must never fail. And it seems to me that it
>can be handy for development purposes.
>--
>Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2019-05-14 02:56:54 | Re: remove doc/bug.template? |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2019-05-14 02:55:01 | Re: pg12 release notes |