Re: Some 9.5beta2 backend processes not terminating properly?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Shay Rojansky <roji(at)roji(dot)org>, hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Some 9.5beta2 backend processes not terminating properly?
Date: 2015-12-30 18:26:34
Message-ID: 20249.1451499994@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> There goes that theory. Amongst others. The aforementioned problem with
> waitfor doesn't seem to be actually armed because waitfor is only used
> if errno == EWOULDBLOCK || errno == EAGAIN.

Mumble. It is clearly possible that we'd reach the Assert failure if
SSL_read were to return -1 and set errno to EWOULDBLOCK or EAGAIN.
I doubt that is what is happening here, because those errnos don't
seem sensible for an EOF condition, but I'd still feel more comfortable
if be_tls_read/be_tls_write handled SSL_ERROR_SYSCALL like this:

if (n != -1)
{
errno = ECONNRESET;
n = -1;
}
+ else
+ {
+ /* just in case errno is EWOULDBLOCK/EAGAIN */
+ *waitfor = WL_SOCKET_READABLE | WL_SOCKET_WRITEABLE;
+ }

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joe Conway 2015-12-30 18:36:02 custom parameters cannot be removed once set
Previous Message Andres Freund 2015-12-30 18:25:13 Re: Some 9.5beta2 backend processes not terminating properly?