Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56])
 by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from
 <pgsql-hackers-owner+M244532=pgsql-hackers-arkari@postgresql.org>)
 id 1WDws9-00059c-S3
 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 14:02:38 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org)
 by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from
 <pgsql-hackers-owner+M244532=pgsql-hackers-arkari@postgresql.org>)
 id 1WDws9-0005xW-8R
 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 14:02:37 +0000
Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:7903:4::125])
 by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80)
 (envelope-from <noah@leadboat.com>) id 1WDws5-0005s7-VT
 for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 14:02:34 +0000
Received: from mail-qa0-f47.google.com ([209.85.216.47])
 by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80)
 (envelope-from <noah@leadboat.com>) id 1WDwrz-00060a-AI
 for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 14:02:33 +0000
Received: by mail-qa0-f47.google.com with SMTP id j5so15852527qaq.6
 for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 06:02:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references
 :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to
 :user-agent;
 bh=kH0sb/6GXcgggypTOyetEYOHB4dInIzyxVA32dxK7LQ=;
 b=jXHVs6B1hJiWbDBMd/T7NMxNkulqKaQ61B5B8LwnFfvcQCpS6KXdr0RMmp8FDcuoxc
 c/yxjhyRrWATDSWjyr8OCxCUPexfxDxWzxXKlRGaMSQXrqclpmnrFUNxRSsKkEcqB7Kt
 qXLnKeoWIxKEVu+dSfg6yP9Qm+bwWRCu8InkV3z+WJdlwBscCZgfPQtbP+Sn7Fqo6Mty
 1T9D7CvoF9opcd9Rwiu//fC0+17xPWCYYwNy4sMlK6oTAT4K2emaKoh6F/2ulL1RBlVM
 LASS+Et5PIfpf8MgzWYzYThKzIsGD/pbLhqIkP9NlQ013pTWrqSsfTigkpS8it3ExSSg
 0oLg==
X-Gm-Message-State: 
 ALoCoQn1TiEjkWa40wemEZLc66VH+g8hEgBYrLrWgeES6m9VyQyY85FTBZEU/GLm/70QPSyBsbai
X-Received: by 10.140.100.240 with SMTP id s103mr2609806qge.38.1392300146469;
 Thu, 13 Feb 2014 06:02:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tornado.leadboat.com (c-107-4-219-91.hsd1.va.comcast.net.
 [107.4.219.91])
 by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id d7sm5582272qad.10.2014.02.13.06.02.25
 for <multiple recipients>
 (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
 Thu, 13 Feb 2014 06:02:26 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 09:02:24 -0500
From: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
 "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Weaker shmem interlock w/o postmaster.pid
Message-ID: <20140213140224.GC2709347@tornado.leadboat.com>
References: <20130911033341.GD225735@tornado.leadboat.com>
 <CA+TgmoZJn7oF8uOQva4sBY=G04UHZ23+p=tjE9NueZsBvHMTFQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20140212230640.GB4831@momjian.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20140212230640.GB4831@momjian.us>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Pg-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--)
List-Archive: <http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers>
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=help>
List-ID: <pgsql-hackers.postgresql.org>
List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org>
List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=sub%20pgsql-hackers>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 06:06:40PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 02:10:45PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 11:33 PM, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote:
> > > I'm thinking to preserve postmaster.pid at immediate shutdown in all released
> > > versions, but I'm less sure about back-patching a change to make
> > > PGSharedMemoryCreate() pickier.  On the one hand, allowing startup to proceed
> > > with backends still active in the same data directory is a corruption hazard.
> > > On the other hand, it could break weird shutdown/restart patterns that permit
> > > trivial lifespan overlap between backends of different postmasters.  Opinions?
> > 
> > I'm more sanguine about the second change than the first.  Leaving
> > postmaster.pid around seems like a clear user-visible behavior change
> > that could break user scripts or have other consequences that we don't
> > foresee; thus, I would vote against back-patching it.  Indeed, I'm not
> > sure it's a good idea to do that even in master.  On the other hand,
> > tightening the checks in PGSharedMemoryCreate() seems very much worth
> > doing, and I think it might also be safe enough to back-patch.
> 
> Were these changes every applied?  I don't see them.

No, I haven't gotten around to writing them.

-- 
Noah Misch
EnterpriseDB                                 http://www.enterprisedb.com


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers