| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: plperl sigfpe reset can crash the server |
| Date: | 2012-08-24 15:09:18 |
| Message-ID: | 5037991E.6000503@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 08/24/2012 10:58 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On Friday, August 24, 2012 04:53:36 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>>> ./pod/perl581delta.pod:
>>> At startup Perl blocks the SIGFPE signal away since there isn't much
>>> Perl can do about it. Previously this blocking was in effect also for
>>> programs executed from within Perl. Now Perl restores the original
>>> SIGFPE handling routine, whatever it was, before running external
>>> programs.
>> So there's a gap in the "restore" logic someplace.
> Well, the logic is not triggering at all in pg's case. Its just used if perl
> is exec()ing something...
>
>
>>> perl.h also has some tidbits: ...
>>> That doesn't sound very well reasoned and especially not very well tested
>>> to me.
>> Time to file a Perl bug?
> Anybody more involved in the perl community volunteering?
>
Just run perlbug and let us know the bug number.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2012-08-24 15:44:33 | Re: pg_upgrade's exec_prog() coding improvement |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-08-24 15:03:16 | Re: pg_upgrade's exec_prog() coding improvement |