Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 5:04 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Yeah. If Robert's diagnosis is correct, and it sounds pretty plausible, >> then this is really just one instance of a bug that's probably pretty >> widespread in our signal handlers. Somebody needs to go through 'em >> all and look for touches of shared memory.
> I haven't made a comprehensive study of every signal handler we have, > [ but here's how to fix procsignal_sigusr1_handler ] I've trawled all the remaining signal handlers (or at least everything declared with SIGNAL_ARGS, which hopefully is all of them). I find the following bugs: 1. A couple of signal handlers do if (MyWalSnd) SetLatch(&MyWalSnd->latch); which is fine as far as it goes, but the shutdown sequence in WalSndKill has exactly the same bug you just fixed in ProcKill: it needs to clear MyWalSnd before disowning the latch, not after. 2. WalRcvSigUsr1Handler and worker_spi_sighup fail to preserve errno. Will fix, but the latter bug is a tad disappointing considering that the coding rule about saving errno in signal handlers has been there for a *long* time. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers