pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
To: torikoshia <torikoshia@oss.nttdata.com>
To: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Printing backtrace of postgres processes
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2022 01:36:07 +0900
Message-ID: <850fa46c-73b8-47cb-901a-090ef036a741@oss.nttdata.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <86eb364537bb48458265c1a0d2fce7f6@oss.nttdata.com>
References: <CALDaNm3HTxjppsN1fe7kJGb-15uO4GN4PvdPu8zaEHtYqQLFhQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALj2ACUFD-CW4n+Piu8pq9TYs1keAz_ga5C-6ZbjWrUGZ1GCMQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALj2ACW00oW1s_NajhaA8f+8jyHCfBRfCD74y+vKXoDZPC2oWw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALDaNm1SjDNaH=sHyD5emm8+F9f-A4x12Xxare0bJ_9iPmexLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALj2ACXLiMFGvGhcL7SsVUX+R1NyyoJ1WR52SNrzFiEq-MY5Xg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALDaNm3m5hVB9CicU5-VzLgT6dvFYYJNyU=8U7OA9+2Wx6=Gqg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAFiTN-ueXOUOfZwuCd27komxXioaaN5sLatceOePkO1nZYUzAg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALDaNm0-UmyWijsiyOGt0JERdS8U_aVpQdoW1UC1g3wZcfwYoA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20211115194251.GP17618@telsasoft.com>
	<CALDaNm2sSLJk3E2ZbCDRqTxDNrH87itv-2TzzGzBHNk7ArY2Og@mail.gmail.com>
	<20211118162243.GL17618@telsasoft.com>
	<CALDaNm0OZZayAdj8izW3Wz222ky=jWdTstuPD_yE_dk-YMC-hw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALj2ACWuC6t7uudfuZpQbwZDe9H9M4mF5nhCq7xC2+BCOSpdDA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALj2ACUN6dPDtE0imOcPWZu7DXVmetjLvzHm=CebyyQfJJKcUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<86eb364537bb48458265c1a0d2fce7f6@oss.nttdata.com>



On 2022/01/24 16:35, torikoshia wrote:
> On 2022-01-14 19:48, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 11:50 AM Bharath Rupireddy
>> <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 4:07 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > The Attached v15 patch has the fixes for the same.
>>>
>>> Thanks. The v15 patch LGTM and the cf bot is happy hence marking it as RfC.
>>
>> The patch was not applying because of the recent commit [1]. I took
>> this opportunity and tried a bunch of things without modifying the
>> core logic of the pg_log_backtrace feature that Vignesh has worked on.

I have one question about this feature. When the PID of auxiliary process like archiver is specified, probably the function always reports the same result, doesn't it? Because, for example, the archiver always logs its backtrace in HandlePgArchInterrupts().

Regards,

-- 
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION





view thread (135+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <850fa46c-73b8-47cb-901a-090ef036a741@oss.nttdata.com>
Permalink:  ../850fa46c-73b8-47cb-901a-090ef036a741@oss.nttdata.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/850fa46c-73b8-47cb-901a-090ef036a741@oss.nttdata.com

 · 

reply
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-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com, torikoshia@oss.nttdata.com, bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
  Subject: Re: Printing backtrace of postgres processes
  In-Reply-To: <850fa46c-73b8-47cb-901a-090ef036a741@oss.nttdata.com>

* 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