Re: bug in SignalSomeChildren

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: bug in SignalSomeChildren
Date: 2010-12-20 20:14:28
Message-ID: AANLkTinotkfZ9CnJ8ruv-sc3aKhzd7g2kf_iGf9Q48Ck@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 2:23 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> I like that better actually ... one less thing for developers to get wrong.
>
>> The attached patch appears to work correctly on MacOS X.  I did check,
>> BTW: getppid() in the attached process returns gdb's pid.  Poor!
>
> Looks good to me.
>
>> For my own purposes, I would be just as happy to apply this only to
>> master.  But I wonder if anyone wants to argue for back-patching, to
>> help debug existing installations?
>
> Given the lack of non-developer complaints, I see no need to backpatch.

Well, non-developers don't tend to attach gdb very often. Alvaro
mentioned a problem installation upthread, thus the question.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Oleg Bartunov 2010-12-20 20:21:19 Happy New Year !
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-12-20 20:11:37 Re: bug in SignalSomeChildren