David Steele <da...@pgmasters.net> writes: > On 1/19/21 1:42 AM, Craig Ringer wrote: >> My suggestion, which I'm happy to post in patch form if you think it's >> reasonable <snip>
> Tom, Robert, and thoughts on the proposals in [1]? > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAGRY4nyNfscmQiZBCNT7cBYnQxJLAAVCGz%2BGZAQDAco1Fbb01w%40mail.gmail.com No objection to generalizing the state passed through pmsignal.c. I'm not very comfortable about the idea of having the postmaster set child processes' latches ... that doesn't sound terribly safe from the standpoint of not allowing the postmaster to mess with shared memory state that could cause it to block or crash. If we already do that elsewhere, then OK, but I don't think we do. regards, tom lane
