On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 at 11:13, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@gmail.com> writes: > > On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 4:52 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> But I'm of the opinion that proc_exit > >> is the wrong thing to use after seeing postmaster death, critical > >> section or no. We should assume that system integrity is already > >> compromised, and get out as fast as we can with as few side-effects > >> as possible. It'll be up to the next generation of postmaster to > >> try to clean up. > > > Then wouldn't backends blocked in LWLockAcquire(x) hang forever, after > > someone who holds x calls _exit()? > > If someone who holds x is killed by (say) the OOM killer, how do > we get out of that?
+1, if we kill-9 PM and then immediately kill-9 lwlock holder, there is no way for system to shutdown (both HEAD and back branches). So we can ignore this case. -- Best regards, Kirill Reshke
