Hi, On 2022-11-17 17:47:50 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Yeah, that or some other NetBSD bug could be the explanation, too. > Without a stack trace it's hard to have any confidence about it, > but I've been unable to reproduce the problem outside the buildfarm. > (Which is a familiar refrain. I wonder what it is about the buildfarm > environment that makes it act different from the exact same code running > on the exact same machine.) > > So I'd like to have some way to make the postmaster send SIGABRT instead > of SIGKILL in the buildfarm environment. The lowest-tech way would be > to drive that off some #define or other. We could scale it up to a GUC > perhaps. Adjacent to that, I also wonder whether SIGABRT wouldn't be > more useful than SIGSTOP for the existing SendStop half-a-feature --- > the idea that people should collect cores manually seems mighty > last-century.
I suspect that having a GUC would be a good idea. I needed something similar recently, debugging an occasional hang in the AIO patchset. I first tried something like your #define approach and it did cause a problematic flood of core files. I ended up using libbacktrace to generate useful backtraces (vs what backtrace_symbols() generates) when receiving SIGQUIT. I didn't do the legwork to make it properly signal safe, but it'd be doable afaiu. Greetings, Andres Freund
