From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <petere(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Don't unblock SIGQUIT in the SIGQUIT handler This was possibly |
Date: | 2010-11-10 11:30:05 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTinex8vqBidr7jiCVJbTUsQ7QAL1M8Kq67Y9vPaG@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 8:05 AM, Peter Eisentraut <petere(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
> Log Message:
> -----------
> Don't unblock SIGQUIT in the SIGQUIT handler
>
> This was possibly linked to a deadlock-like situation in glibc syslog code
> invoked by the ereport call in quickdie(). In any case, a signal handler
> should not unblock its own signal unless there is a specific reason to.
>
> Modified Files:
> --------------
> pgsql/src/backend/tcop:
> postgres.c (r1.577 -> r1.578)
> (http://anoncvs.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/backend/tcop/postgres.c?r1=1.577&r2=1.578)
> pgsql/src/include/libpq:
> pqsignal.h (r1.35 -> r1.36)
> (http://anoncvs.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/include/libpq/pqsignal.h?r1=1.35&r2=1.36)
Why wasn't this patch backported? Recently my customer encountered
the bug which this patch fixed, in 8.3.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-11-10 14:08:47 | pgsql: Mention that pg_upgrade requires compatible 32/64-bit binaries. |
Previous Message | User Itagaki | 2010-11-10 08:19:55 | textsearch-ja - eudc: Add configuration parameters: |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Viktor Valy | 2010-11-10 11:32:10 | Re: TODO Alter Table Rename Constraint |
Previous Message | Boszormenyi Zoltan | 2010-11-10 10:44:52 | ECPG question about PREPARE and EXECUTE |