On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 2014-11-01 17:00:59 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> > I doubt it. There's a whole bunch of problems that just exist by virtue >> > of having a group leader. What if the leader dies but the worker backend >> > isn't in a section of code that does a CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS()? >> >> In between all of the heat about whether I'm writing the correct >> patch, or whether I'm overall making progress fast enough, somebody >> could, I don't know, read the patch. > > I plan to, but that takes a fair amount of time. And there's at least > one patch of yours ahead in the queue... And I do think that most of the > concerns are more general than a specific implementation.
Fair enough. Well, the way I solved that specific problem is to allow the group leader to terminate but not to return its PGPROC to the free list until the last group member exits. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
