Hi, On 2022-02-16 20:14:04 -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote: > >> - while ((spc_de = ReadDirExtended(spc_dir, "pg_tblspc", LOG)) != NULL) > >> + while (!ShutdownRequestPending && > >> + (spc_de = ReadDirExtended(spc_dir, "pg_tblspc", LOG)) != > >> NULL) > > > > Uh, huh? It strikes me as a supremely bad idea to have functions *silently* > > not do their jobs when ShutdownRequestPending is set, particularly without a > > huge fat comment. > > The idea was to avoid delaying shutdown because we're waiting for the > custodian to finish relatively nonessential tasks. Another option might be > to just exit immediately when the custodian receives a shutdown request.
I think we should just not do either of these and let the functions finish. For the cases where shutdown really needs to be immediate there's, uhm, immediate mode shutdowns. > > Why does this not open us up to new xid wraparound issues? Before there was > > a > > hard bound on how long these files could linger around. Now there's not > > anymore. > > Sorry, I'm probably missing something obvious, but I'm not sure how this > adds transaction ID wraparound risk. These files are tied to LSNs, and > AFAIK they won't impact slots' xmins. They're accessed by xid. The LSN is just for cleanup. Accessing files left over from a previous transaction with the same xid wouldn't be good - we'd read wrong catalog state for decoding... Andres
