MIME-Version: 1.0
References: 
 <CAHGQGwFzNYroAxSoyJhqTU-pH=t4Ej6RyvhVmBZ91Exj_TPMMQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA4eK1+CrQNqiPDKv1wYfdkbX0FARJoi1=0ioaAqkLzbq2vG1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHGQGwHABvuCoyM24HUiFZ5oJq_CoFomjt_cqD-0cJLMjFXJjQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA4eK1LzZGfRANPAnv6NpKCH2ENuZO6HswgY14A=xsOXmucPhw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABdArM6nepct0uxizCnZqy-kAjjTOndvu7bWtaNcmknuxx82Hg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJpy0uBhJB4HqouLXegD=miSkZfZp86tTC2K0K6nf=bHCcsPLQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABdArM6Mfhk2+9TVR_D3cgfPWPfHDuZEg7MOc5KqULwt0OcQUg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA4eK1+d2vN80-Yvy_Hr=ATF3XL5db+_W-sXF=2Vxm+OFBO82w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA4eK1KxU4b53GUor41A55x+Bx-DdOaQ9g1DqURyRY2Cg-hhPQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABdArM6pmn5yFqiU33KTYBXYM=Vny2ULnJY_gqFbsMEdt+1dPA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHGQGwEsEjXbCthXb02=HScBW7C=BHmygv9SK1VGCcc-9bmTsw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABdArM5rrhSmFvVL4C5LL0iea-R0HRtB=ZvD=ereoTDa1Tm=NA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJpy0uD5brcAOpM8+UGfpzrm4pu-vsSfQUT2zgmcKsXEb8++4Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABdArM6E2aBj0FUjr2870sZUQqc6mpV1xSM=sqUFd2tKbfUQHA@mail.gmail.com>
 <TY4PR01MB16907318494FF276465E97DF79453A@TY4PR01MB16907.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
 <CABdArM5RqLna+Y3CF=0BKew-WyxoAKXgcaOnXG1DZpMEiogCqw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHGQGwF1=zu478YX1kNaX+qaNp9DH_p+5ZdSfFdTa=JuynJufQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABdArM7OsLhyactNNUZ+Wygc_ybv4hhgje9c+h+=PHm3QdS4iQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHGQGwHndKa--mCKAaSpAtdTte_3RJkUueZcDSqdUASqTsDK0Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA4eK1JwVewYZc7eyF9x2-G+Y1ikgU5+a5gmQR+ssft++V51ZA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAA4eK1JwVewYZc7eyF9x2-G+Y1ikgU5+a5gmQR+ssft++V51ZA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2026 22:16:16 +0900
Message-ID: 
 <CAHGQGwHo8f+d3wF-beh6fQnftAkJUyd4mLm2Kg_m41Dg+6dCQQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Use SIGTERM instead of SIGUSR1 for slotsync worker to exit during
 promotion?
To: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Cc: Nisha Moond <nisha.moond412@gmail.com>,
	"Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>,
 shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAHGQGwHo8f%2Bd3wF-beh6fQnftAkJUyd4mLm2Kg_m41Dg%2B6dCQQ%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Apr 2, 2026 at 3:34=E2=80=AFPM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com=
> wrote:
> It is because we added retry slot-sync logic for API in master in
> commit 0d2d4a0ec3eca64e7f5ce7f7630b56a561b2663c. So, there is no
> chance of API waiting except for the race condition being discussed
> here.

Thanks for the info!


> > but it seems we need to backpatch it first before backpatching this pat=
ch.
> > Thought?
> >
>
> I feel the use of API before this version was mainly for test-cases as
> it was not production ready. So, it is less helpful to backpatch
> 1362bc33e02, if we want, we can backpatch only the worker part of the
> fix. OTOH, as the issue is not frequent and we have some workaround
> (at least for more common platforms) as well, we can consider not
> backpatching it.

I see your point. OTOH, on second thought, if backpatching commit 1362bc33e=
02
along with this patch to v17 and v18 *is harmless*, I'd prefer to do so. Ke=
eping
the slotsync shutdown code more consistent across versions would make futur=
e
backpatching easier, and selectively backpatching only parts of the shutdow=
n
logic would be more complicated and error-prone. Thought?

Regards,

--=20
Fujii Masao