From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Fix DROP TABLESPACE on Windows with ProcSignalBarrier? |
Date: | 2022-02-11 21:22:50 |
Message-ID: | CA+hUKG+0ecX9H3Nus0iysfe2dK+FH=J51mnUKuy-PO6eRV4kSQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 10:23 AM Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> That's fixed now. So what should we do about this patch? This is a
> bug, so it would be nice to do *something*. I don't really like the
> fact that this makes the behavior contingent on USE_ASSERT_CHECKING,
> and I suggest that you make a new symbol like USE_BARRIER_SMGR_RELEASE
> which by default gets defined on WIN32, but can be defined elsewhere
> if you want (see the treatment of EXEC_BACKEND in pg_config_manual.h).
Ok, done like that.
> Furthermore, I can't see back-patching this, given that it would be
> the very first use of the barrier machinery. But I think it would be
> good to get something into master, because then we'd actually be using
> this procsignalbarrier stuff for something. On a good day we've fixed
> a bug. On a bad day we'll learn something new about how
> procsignalbarrier needs to work.
Agreed.
Pushed. The basic Windows/tablespace bug seen occasionally in CI[1]
should now be fixed.
For the sake of the archives, here's a link to the ongoing discussion
about further potential uses of this mechanism:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20220209220004.kb3dgtn2x2k2gtdm%40alap3.anarazel.de
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joseph Koshakow | 2022-02-11 21:58:09 | Re: Fix overflow in DecodeInterval |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2022-02-11 21:19:12 | Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints |