From: "Andres Freund" <and...@2ndquadrant.com>
I think we should do what the first paragraph in http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/20140707155113.GB1136%40alap3.anarazel.de outlined. As Tom says somewhere downthread that requires some code review, but other than that it should get rid of a fair amount of problems.
As mentioned in the mail I've just sent, there seems to be a problem around the latch and/or sinval catchup implementation.
Or, is it bad that many things are done in SIGUSR1 handler? If some processing in SIGUSR1 handler requires waiting on a latch, it hangs at WaitLatch(). Currently, the only processing in the backend which requires a latch may be to wait for the sync standby. However, in the future, the latch may be used for more tasks.
Another problem is, who knows WaitLatch() can return prematurely (before the actual waited-for event does SetLatch()) due to the SIGUSR1 issued for sinval catchup event?
How should we tackle these problem? Regards MauMau -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
