> On 1 Mar 2021, at 12:54, Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@gmail.com> wrote:
Based on my (limited) experience with procsignalbarriers I think this patch is correct; the general rule-of-thumb of synchronizing backend state on barrier absorption doesn't really apply in this case, literally all we want is to know that we've hit one interrupt and performed removals. >> +#if defined(WIN32) || defined(USE_ASSERT_CHECKING) >> >> Is the USE_ASSERT_CHECKING clause to exercise the code a more frequent than >> just on Windows? That could warrant a quick word in the comment if so IMO to >> avoid confusion. > > Note added. Since there is no way to get make the first destroy_tablespace_directories call fail on purpose in testing, the assertion coverage may have limited use though? I don't have a Windows env handy right now, but everything works as expected when testing this on Linux and macOS by inducing the codepath. Will try to do some testing in Windows as well. -- Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/
