From: | Gurjeet Singh <gurjeet(at)singh(dot)im> |
---|---|
To: | "Drouvot, Bertrand" <bdrouvot(at)amazon(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Patch proposal: New hooks in the connection path |
Date: | 2022-08-14 05:52:33 |
Message-ID: | CABwTF4UMRmxUY7nxdP6T3fhVma+5ZnJj7Zf_ieZzQBZ1ssBGzA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
(reposting the same review, with many grammatical fixes)
On Mon, Aug 8, 2022 at 3:51 AM Drouvot, Bertrand <bdrouvot(at)amazon(dot)com> wrote:
> Please find attached v2-0004-connection_hooks.patch
/*
* Stop here if it was bad or a cancel packet. ProcessStartupPacket
* already did any appropriate error reporting.
*/
if (status != STATUS_OK)
+ {
+#ifndef EXEC_BACKEND
+ if (FailedConnection_hook)
+ (*FailedConnection_hook) (FCET_BAD_STARTUP_PACKET, port);
+#endif
proc_exit(0);
+ }
Per the comment above the if condition, the `status != OK` may
represent a cancel packet, as well. Clearly, a cancel packet is not
the same as a _bad_ packet. So I think here you need to differentiate
between a cancel packet and a genuinely bad packet; I don't see
anything good coming out of us, or the hook-developer, lumping
those 2 cases together.
I think we can reduce the number of places the hook is called, if we
call the hook from proc_exit(), and at all the other places we simply set
a global variable to signify the reason for the failure. The case of
_exit(1) from the signal-handler cannot use such a mechanism, but I
think all the other cases of interest can simply register one of the
FCET_* values, and let the call from proc_exit() pass that value
to the hook.
If we can convince ourselves that we can use proc_exit(1) in
StartupPacketTimeoutHandler(), instead of calling _exit(1), I think we
cal replace all call sites for this hook with the
set-global-variable variant.
> ...
> * This should be the only function to call exit().
> * -cim 2/6/90
>...
> proc_exit(int code)
The comment on proc_exit() claims that it should be the only place
calling exit(), except that the add-on/extension hooks may ignore this.
So there must be a strong reason why the signal-handler uses _exit()
to bypass all callbacks.
Best regards,
Gurjeet
http://Gurje.et
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2022-08-14 09:57:40 | Re: [PATCH] Expose port->authn_id to extensions and triggers |
Previous Message | Gurjeet Singh | 2022-08-14 05:45:53 | Re: Patch proposal: New hooks in the connection path |