public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Fujii Masao <[email protected]>
To: Kyotaro Horiguchi <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Network failure may prevent promotion
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2024 15:07:10 +0900
Message-ID: <CAHGQGwGSQratfsnAwAH6kygmdfv7u+S3UzcwbwB66YzoWZiFaQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>

On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 1:23 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> At Mon, 22 Jan 2024 13:29:10 -0800, Andres Freund <[email protected]> wrote in
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 2024-01-19 12:28:05 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 03:42:28PM +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> > > > Given that commit 728f86fec6 that introduced this issue was not strictly
> > > > required, perhaps we should just revert it for v16.
> > >
> > > Is there a point in keeping 728f86fec6 as well on HEAD?  That does not
> > > strike me as wise to keep that in the tree for now.  If it needs to be
> > > reworked, looking at this problem from scratch would be a safer
> > > approach.
> >
> > IDK, I think we'll introduce this type of bug over and over if we don't fix it
> > properly.
>
> Just to clarify my position, I thought that 728f86fec6 was heading the
> right direction. Considering the current approach to signal handling
> in walreceiver, I believed that it would be better to further
> generalize in this direction rather than reverting. That's why I
> proposed that patch.

Regarding the patch, here are the review comments.

+/*
+ * Is current process a wal receiver?
+ */
+bool
+IsWalReceiver(void)
+{
+ return WalRcv != NULL;
+}

This looks wrong because WalRcv can be non-NULL in processes other
than walreceiver.

- pqsignal(SIGTERM, SignalHandlerForShutdownRequest); /* request shutdown */
+ pqsignal(SIGTERM, WalRcvShutdownSignalHandler); /* request shutdown */

Can't we just use die(), instead?

Regards,

-- 
Fujii Masao

view thread (18+ messages)  latest in thread

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: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: Network failure may prevent promotion
  In-Reply-To: <CAHGQGwGSQratfsnAwAH6kygmdfv7u+S3UzcwbwB66YzoWZiFaQ@mail.gmail.com>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox