| From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage |
| Date: | 2022-08-06 23:29:55 |
| Message-ID: | CA+hUKG+8KJFC5_+SZtUGbLgC1tm4zEE3aAUgTw_i+ZDNu-zzkw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Aug 7, 2022 at 10:42 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > Did I understand correctly that the places that do kill(-pid) followed
> > by kill(pid) really only need the kill(-pid)?
>
> Uh ... did you read the comment right above signal_child?
>
> * There is a race condition for recently-forked children: they might not
> * have executed setsid() yet. So we signal the child directly as well as
> * the group. We assume such a child will handle the signal before trying
> * to spawn any grandchild processes. We also assume that signaling the
> * child twice will not cause any problems.
Oof. Fixed.
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v2-0001-Simplify-conditional-code-for-process-groups.patch | text/x-patch | 8.5 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2022-08-06 23:47:31 | Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2022-08-06 23:22:54 | Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage |