From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: SIGQUIT handling, redux
In-reply-to: <12863.1599662788@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <1850884.1599601164@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20200909143900.GQ29590@tamriel.snowman.net> <12863.1599662788@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Comments: In-reply-to Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	message dated "Wed, 09 Sep 2020 10:46:28 -0400"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <13218.1599663323.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2020 10:55:23 -0400
Message-ID: <13219.1599663323@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

I wrote:
> Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
>> As I mentioned over there, I agree that we should do this and we should
>> further have the statistics collector also do so, which currently sets
>> up SIGQUIT with ShutdownRequestPending() and in its loop decides it's
>> fine to write out the stats file (which we're going to remove during
>> recovery anyway...) and then call exit(0).

> I noticed that that was different from everything else, but it's not
> actually signal-unsafe, so it seems like a different topic from what
> I'm on about at the moment.  I don't mind if you or somebody else
> wants to change it, but I don't see it as a back-patchable bug fix.

Note also that the postmaster actually uses SIGQUIT to command normal
shutdown of the stats collector (cf reaper(), around line 3125 in HEAD).
So this needs a change in signaling conventions, not just internal
tweaks in the collector.  Not a big deal, but it reinforces my feeling
that it should be a HEAD-only change.

			regards, tom lane