Subject: Re: BUG #17073: docs - "Improve signal handling reliability"
To: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, lizenko79@gmail.com,
 PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>
References: <17073-1a5fdaed0fa5d4d0@postgresql.org>
 <20210629010241.GB32681@momjian.us>
 <47587340-8c50-391a-5b63-f1d07684acbe@oss.nttdata.com>
 <CAKFQuwbxrx5YnRniPBCkVb4hA12gQES0GNPofDN03L5gHzZN7g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
Message-ID: <700ef6dd-177f-5fb6-7cc6-2df66fedc365@oss.nttdata.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2021 10:52:43 +0900
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:78.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAKFQuwbxrx5YnRniPBCkVb4hA12gQES0GNPofDN03L5gHzZN7g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/700ef6dd-177f-5fb6-7cc6-2df66fedc365%40oss.nttdata.com>
Precedence: bulk


On 2021/07/01 10:17, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 5:54 PM Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com <mailto:masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>> wrote:
> 
>     On 2021/06/29 10:02, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>      > On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 02:11:57AM +0000, PG Bug reporting form wrote:
>      >> The following bug has been logged on the website:
>      >>
>      >> Bug reference:      17073
>      >> Logged by:          Andrey Lizenko
>      >> Email address: lizenko79@gmail.com <mailto:lizenko79@gmail.com>
>      >> PostgreSQL version: 14beta2
>      >> Operating system:   any
>      >> Description:
>      >>
>      >> Looks like description was missed or corrupted for the following release
>      >> note:
>      >> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/14/release-14.html <https://www.postgresql.org/docs/14/release-14.html>
>      >>
>      >> Improve signal handling reliability (Fujii Masao)
>      >> GENERAL ENOUGH?
>      >
>      > It means I am not clear if this text is accurate or needs improvement.
> 
>     Since this explains the commit 2945a488a, it's better to describe
>     something like the following?
> 
>           Make the standby handle signal promptly.
> 
>           Previously there was the case where the standby could not promptly
>           handle the signal like shutdown request received while waiting on
>           wal_retrieve_retry_interval.
> 
> 
> The wording still needs some work...but is this even release note worthy?

This change is not so user-visible, so I have no strong opinion about
whether to list this in the release note.


> We forget to check for interrupts before sleeping in an otherwise busy-wait loop.  We corrected the oversight.
> 
> Otherwise, "The standby startup process now promptly handles interrupts."
> 
> Most of what I'm reading says this only impacted the startup of the standby process; normal operations already worked correctly.  Is that correct?

Yes, you're right.

Regards,

-- 
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION