Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dwXUw-000740-9e for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 17:48:50 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dwXUv-0000AB-Sk for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 17:48:49 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dwXTM-0002jH-5K for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 17:47:12 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dwXTJ-0003HK-7I for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 17:47:11 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v8PHl49L020214; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 13:47:04 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Robert Haas cc: Thomas Munro , Andres Freund , amul sul , PostgreSQL-development Subject: Re: Server crash due to SIGBUS(Bus Error) when trying to access the memory created using dsm_create(). In-reply-to: References: <25838.1471010881@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20170628230458.n5ehizmvhoerr5yq@alap3.anarazel.de> <26247.1506349378@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Robert Haas message dated "Mon, 25 Sep 2017 12:13:27 -0400" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <20212.1506361624.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 13:47:04 -0400 Message-ID: <20213.1506361624@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org Robert Haas writes: > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Thomas Munro writes: >>> So, do we want this patch? >> I think we don't really have a lot of choice. I propose applying this >> as far back as 9.6 --- anyone think differently? > +1. If applies to 9.5 and 9.4 without a lot of work, I think we > should apply it there as well, in case there is out-of-core use of DSM > (or, in 9.5, also of ParallelContext). I'll take a look, but I doubt it's worth much extra effort (and you seem to agree). regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers