Re: non-exclusive backup cleanup is mildly broken

On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 7:05 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > Perhaps I spoke too soon: I'm not sure whether Michael's comments
> > amount to an objection. While I give him a chance to respond, here's
> > an updated patch.
>
> Took a quick look. I agree that this seems a lot cleaner than the
> alternative proposals. I'd suggest however that the header comment
> for do_pg_abort_backup could do with more work, perhaps along the
> lines of "The odd-looking signature allows this to be registered
> directly as a shmem_exit handler".
>
> Personally I'd have kept the handler as a separate function that's just
> a one-line wrapper around "void do_pg_abort_backup(bool emit_warning)".
> We don't usually treat callbacks as functions to be also called in
> their own right. But if you don't want to do that, I'll settle for an
> acknowledgement of the hack in the comment.
>

As would I, but I'm also fine with either of the two ways.

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/>
Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/>