On 2014-07-23 00:13:26 +0900, MauMau wrote: > Hello, Robert-san, Andres-san, Tom-san, > > From: "Andres Freund" <and...@2ndquadrant.com> > >a) There very well could be a backend reconnecting to that > > backendId. Then we potentially might try to remove the temp schema > > from two backends - I'm not sure that's always going to end up going > > well. There's already a race window, but it's pretty darn unlikely to > > hit it right now because the wraparound case pretty much implies that > > nothing has used that backendid slot for a while. > > I guess we could do something like: > > > > LockDatabaseObject(tempschema); > > if (SearchSysCacheExists1) > > /* bailout */ > > performDeletion(...); > > > >b) I think at the very least we also need to call RemovePgTempFiles() > > during crash restart. > > Thank you for showing the direction. I'll investigate the code. But that > will be tomorrow as it's already past midnight. > > Could it be included in 9.2.9 if I could submit the patch tomorrow? (I'm not > confident I can finish it...) I'd really appreciate it if you could create > the fix, if tomorrow will be late.
9.2.9 is already stamped, so no. But even without that, I don't think that this is a change that should be rushed into the backbranches. The risk/benefit ratio just isn't on the size of doing things hastily. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
