From: | Qingqing Zhou <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: EINTR error in SunOS |
Date: | 2006-01-01 18:59:53 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.58.0601011354500.14558@eon.cs |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, 1 Jan 2006, Tom Lane wrote:
> Qingqing Zhou <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu> writes:
> > I understand put a CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() in the retry-loop may make more
> > graceful stop, but it won't work in some cases -- notice that the io
> > routines we will patch can be used before the signal mechanism is setup.
>
> I don't think it will help much at all: too many of the operations in
> question are invoked in places where CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS is a no-op.
> Examples:
> * disk writes are mostly done by the bgwriter and not backends at all
> * unlinks are generally done during xact commit/rollback
>
Right.
> Qingqing's point about failures in system()-invoked commands (think
> archive_command for PITR) is a mighty good one too. That puts a
> serious crimp into any illusion that we can really fix this in any
> reliable way.
>
Not my credit, I just collect Rod & Greg's posts about this here :-) And I
still not sure what exactly the problem we want to fix here -- think our
target is the "operation should not faild because of EINTR".
Regards,
Qingqing
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2006-01-01 19:02:03 | Re: Why don't we allow DNS names in pg_hba.conf? |
Previous Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2006-01-01 18:50:37 | Re: Why don't we allow DNS names in pg_hba.conf? |