On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 11:37 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbal...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 10:34 AM vignesh C <vignes...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Thanks for the comments, the attached v12 patch has the changes for the > > same. > > I have reviewed this patch and have some comments on v12-0001, > > 1. > + This feature is not supported for the postmaster, logger, > checkpointer, > + walwriter, background writer or statistics collector process. This > > > Comment says it is not supported for postmaster, logger, checkpointer > etc, but I just tried and it is working for checkpointer and walwriter > processes, can you explain in comments why do we not want to support > for these processes? or the comment is old and now we are supporting > for some of these processes.
Please see the v12-0002 which will have the description modified. > 2. > postgres[64154]=# select pg_print_backtrace(64136); > WARNING: 01000: PID 64136 is not a PostgreSQL server process > LOCATION: pg_print_backtrace, signalfuncs.c:335 > pg_print_backtrace > -------------------- > f > > > For postmaster I am getting this WARNING "PID 64136 is not a > PostgreSQL server process", even if we don't want to support this > process I don't think this message is good. This is a generic message that is coming from pg_signal_backend, not related to Vignesh's patch. I agree with you that emitting a "not postgres server process" for the postmaster process which is the main "postgres process" doesn't sound sensible. Please see there's already a thread [1] and see the v1 patch [2] for changing this message. Please let me know if you want me to revive that stalled thread? [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALj2ACW7Rr-R7mBcBQiXWPp%3DJV5chajjTdudLiF5YcpW-BmHhg%40mail.gmail.com [2] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALj2ACUGxedgYk-5nO8D2EJV2YHXnoycp_oqYAxDXTODhWkmkg%40mail.gmail.com Regards, Bharath Rupireddy.
