Re: Win32 lost signals open item

Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.db.postgresql.devel.win32,gmane.comp.db.postgresql.devel.general
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> writes:
> > We have this open item:
> >     Win32
> >         o Handle "lost signals" on backend startup (eg. shutdown,
> >           config file changes, etc);  signals are SIG_DFL on startup
> 
> >           The problem here is that the postmaster might send signals to a
> >           child before the signal handlers are installed.  We don't have
> >           this problem on unix because we fork and inherit the signal
> >           handlers.
> 
> FWIW, I think the todo's description of the problem is completely
> inaccurate.  The issue is not the lack of signal handler settings per

OK, updated:

        o Handle "lost signals" on backend startup (eg. shutdown,
          config file changes, etc);  signals are not possible on
          startup

          The problem here is that the postmaster might send signals to a
          child before the Win32 pipe is created to accept signals.
          We don't have this problem on unix because we fork and inherit
          the signal handlers.

> se, it is that our pipe-based emulation of signals isn't ready to
> collect signal messages until some time after the child process starts.
> 
> Could this be fixed by having the postmaster set up the pipe *before* it
> forks/execs the child?  We'd probably need to pass down some additional
> info to inform the child where it has to hook into the pipe structure,
> but passing down more state is no problem.

Not sure.  Magnus?

> > The only solution I can think of for us is to set a PROC struct variable
> > when you can't send the Win32 backend a signal and have the backend
> > check this PROC variable after it starts listening for signals. 
> 
> A backend does not create its PROC entry until *long* after it gets
> forked, so this does not sound like a path to a solution.  Also, I'd
> prefer to be able to signal non-backend children such as pgstat.  (I'm
> not sure if the current code actually needs that, but I can definitely
> believe that we'll need to do it some day.)  Also, we do need to be able
> to signal the postmaster from backends, so we cannot tie the signal
> mechanism to the assumption that every signalable process has or will
> eventually have a PROC entry.

OK.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  [email protected]               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
      subscribe-nomail command to [email protected] so that your
      message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.