On 23/10/2024 12:18, Pavel Borisov wrote:
Hi, Hackers!
Current comments on the usage of WL_POSTMASTER_DEATH state that it
should be used for scenarios of finishing other than immediately i.e.
returning values and waiting for postmaster dies.
In fact, in parts of the code, it's currently used to immediately exit
or throw FATAL (in the walsender and in libpq).
So I propose change the comments on WL_POSTMASTER_DEATH stating that it
could be used for both cases: for processing and setting return values
if that's needed, and for immediate exit otherwise.
I see what you mean, but I don't think the proposed patch is making it
better. With WL_POSTMASTER_DEATH, the WaitLatch call returns if the
postmaster dies. What the caller does then is the caller's business.
That's different from WL_EXIT_ON_PM_DEATH in that with
WL_EXIT_ON_PM_DEATH, WaitLatch itself will do the exit(), not the caller.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
Neon (https://neon.tech)
