From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
Cc: pgsql-committers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pgsql: Consistently test for in-use shared memory.
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 21:34:55 -0400
Message-ID: <30005.1555378495@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190416011830.GB3296237@rfd.leadboat.com>
References: <E1hFBbx-0002OI-Pb@gemulon.postgresql.org>
<26478.1555373328@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20190416005019.GA3296237@rfd.leadboat.com>
<28362.1555375956@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<28797.1555376505@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20190416011830.GB3296237@rfd.leadboat.com>
Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> writes:
> No. We expect never to run one; it was there for the unexpected case of
> "postgres --single" startup succeeding. I pushed a change to close the stdin
> of "postgres --single" instead of writing to it.
Ah, good, that's safer than what I was imagining.
> I probably worried that
> "postgres --single" would not tolerate that, but it seems to.
Sure. EOF-on-stdin is the standard way to end a standalone-backend
session. This fix means it'd have zero queries to execute rather
than one, but I'd be entirely willing to call it a backend bug if that
didn't work.
The more important point of course is that we must correctly detect
test failure if the backend doesn't complain. But since the test
explicitly looks for a particular error message text, that seems
fine.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, noah@leadboat.com, pgsql-committers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pgsql: Consistently test for in-use shared memory.
In-Reply-To: <30005.1555378495@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox