On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 9:16 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Thomas Munro writes:
> > So I think we probably need something like the attached, which I was
> > originally trying to avoid.
>
> Yeah, something like that. I also wonder if you don't need to think
> a bit harder about the ordering of the flag
Thomas Munro writes:
> So I think we probably need something like the attached, which I was
> originally trying to avoid.
Yeah, something like that. I also wonder if you don't need to think
a bit harder about the ordering of the flag checks, in particular
it seems like servicing reload_request
On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 11:24 AM Thomas Munro wrote:
> Another idea would be to teach the latch infrastructure itself to
> magically swap latch events to position 0. Latches are usually
> prioritised; it's only in this rare race case that they are not.
I liked that idea for a while, but I
On Sun, Jan 15, 2023 at 12:35 AM Thomas Munro wrote:
> Here's a sketch of the first idea.
To hit the problem case, the signal needs to arrive in between the
latch->is_set check and the epoll_wait() call, and the handler needs
to take a while to get started. (If it arrives before the
On Sat, Jan 14, 2023 at 10:29 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> But if that's the general idea, I suppose there would be two ways to
> give higher priority to signals/latches that arrive in the same set of
> events: (1) scan the events array twice (for latches then
> connections), or (2) check our pending
On Sat, Jan 14, 2023 at 8:55 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> "houzj.f...@fujitsu.com" writes:
> > I noticed one BF failure[1] when monitoring the BF for some other commit.
> > [1]
> > https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=malleefowl=2023-01-13%2009%3A54%3A51
> > ...
> > So it seems the
"houzj.f...@fujitsu.com" writes:
> I noticed one BF failure[1] when monitoring the BF for some other commit.
> [1]
> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=malleefowl=2023-01-13%2009%3A54%3A51
> ...
> So it seems the connection happens before pg_ident.conf is actually reloaded ?
Hi,
I noticed one BF failure[1] when monitoring the BF for some other commit.
# Failed test 'authentication success for method password, connstr
user=scram_role: log matches'
# at t/001_password.pl line 120.
# '2023-01-13 07:33:46.741 EST [243628:5] LOG: received
SIGHUP,
