Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2020 16:40:57 +0900
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>,
	Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Issue with cancel_before_shmem_exit while searching to remove a
 particular registered exit callbacks
Message-ID: <20200907074057.GG4867@paquier.xyz>
References: 
 <CA+TgmoY8hrNE-sO+B95M8AD6CL9VohSMik2VZkrnkbANRDS5gw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200807212022.wocdoo2mmzhjsjm3@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <CA+TgmoYgNMc7x814iih==wH-jN-4bO_FH_xWBdV5HEK=6e3kDQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3195298.1597070661@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CA+TgmobBH1SGmQY6G9x4nth03bJXyg2FXEbmNqs-_aRp1peAgQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3250875.1597088493@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CA+Tgmoaz=e0CEOVpFTMRtanXX+0P-1uRrYtKdWktQedLtGs6Qg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200811001102.bwcwmrwgirxyec6i@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <3354159.1597106762@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CA+TgmobSwOUTonpKUKaVLiK2XGLw4OcVn+hyffJKBNbZcJpACw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="6BvahUXLYAruDZOj"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: 
 <CA+TgmobSwOUTonpKUKaVLiK2XGLw4OcVn+hyffJKBNbZcJpACw@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk


--6BvahUXLYAruDZOj
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 10:10:08PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> That split dates to the parallel query work, and there are some
> comments in shmem_exit() about it; see in particular the explanation
> in the middle where it says "Call dynamic shared memory callbacks." It
> seemed to me that I needed the re-entrancy behavior that is described
> there, but for a set of callbacks that needed to run before some of
> the existing callbacks and after others.

We still have a CF entry here:
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/29/2649/

Is there still something that needs to absolutely be done here knowing
that we have bab1500 that got rid of the root issue?  Can the CF entry
be marked as committed?

(FWIW, I would move any discussion about improving more stuff related
to shared memory cleanup code at proc exit into a new thread, as that
looks like a new topic.)
--
Michael

--6BvahUXLYAruDZOj
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=JmNU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--6BvahUXLYAruDZOj--