| From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Shouldn't GSSAPI and SSL code use FeBeWaitSet? |
| Date: | 2020-02-24 03:49:45 |
| Message-ID: | CA+hUKGK=m9dLrq42oWQ4XfK9iDjGiZVwpQ1HkHrAPfG7Kh681g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
While working on a patch to reuse a common WaitEventSet for latch
waits, I noticed that be-secure-gssapi.c and be-secure-openssl.c don't
use FeBeWaitSet. They probably should, for consistency with
be-secure.c, because that surely holds the socket they want, no? The
attached patch passes the "ssl" and "kerberos" tests and reaches that
code, confirmed by adding some log messages.
I'm not actually sure what the rationale is for reporting "terminating
connection due to unexpected postmaster exit" here but not elsewhere.
I copied the error from be-secure.c.
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| 0001-Use-FeBeWaitSet-for-GSSAPI-and-SSL-waits.patch | text/x-patch | 4.2 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2020-02-24 03:55:35 | Re: Shouldn't GSSAPI and SSL code use FeBeWaitSet? |
| Previous Message | Hubert Zhang | 2020-02-24 02:08:15 | Re: Yet another vectorized engine |