| From: | Mats Kindahl <mats(at)timescale(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, daniel(at)yesql(dot)se, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Crash during backend start when low on memory |
| Date: | 2023-01-16 21:10:10 |
| Message-ID: | CA+14427pjo8-V2z+Rv5S6JL2-1JXzhQ0t_FkBaEx13_H7sPLdg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 9:58 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Mats Kindahl <mats(at)timescale(dot)com> writes:
> > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 4:01 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> Yeah, the BackendStartup change is 100% wrong; it is replacing
> >> perfectly good code that recovers correctly with bad code that
> >> will take down the postmaster (not a backend child!) on OOM.
>
> > AFAICT, the error is caught by the caller (using PG_TRY), executes some
> > cleanup code, and then continues executing, so it shouldn't take down the
> > postmaster.
>
> There are no PG_TRY blocks in the postmaster, and certainly no recovery.
>
I added one in the patch. Doesn't this work? It seemed to work when I tried
it.
Best wishes,
Mats Kindahl
> regards, tom lane
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2023-01-16 21:49:30 | Re: Crash during backend start when low on memory |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2023-01-16 20:58:43 | Re: Crash during backend start when low on memory |