From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | David Kohn <djk447(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #15036: Un-killable queries Hanging in BgWorkerShutdown |
Date: | 2018-02-11 01:17:04 |
Message-ID: | CAEepm=1Hiqp8LwicWLv_gvG8iAUsS99r24MstYRSzrUCOwnnbQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 1:34 PM, Thomas Munro
<thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 7:06 AM, David Kohn <djk447(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> I'm not clear on when we do a SetLatch on those message queues during a
>> cancel of parallel workers, and a number of other things that could
>> definitely invalidate this analysis, but I think there could be a plausible
>> explanation in there somewhere.
>
> shm_mq_detach_internal() does SetLatch(&victim->procLatch) ("victim"
> being the counterparty process) after setting mq_detached. So ideally
> no one should ever be able to wait forever on a queue from which the
> other end has detached, but perhaps there is some race condition style
> bug lurking in here. I'm going to do some testing and see if I can
> break this...
I tried, but didn't get anywhere with this.
--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Kohn | 2018-02-11 01:58:00 | Re: BUG #15036: Un-killable queries Hanging in BgWorkerShutdown |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2018-02-10 22:55:29 | Re: BUG #15026: Deadlock using GIST index |