On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 2:26 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > You are arguing from assumptions not in evidence, specifically that > if we reap a PID that isn't one we recognize, this must be what > happened. I think it's *at least* as likely that the case implies > some bug in the postmaster's child-process bookkeeping, ...
It's hard to rule that out completely, but it doesn't seem incredibly likely to me. I would think that if we had such bugs they would result in system instability that is also not in evidence. > Independently of that, as was pointed out upthread, being init requires > more than just ignoring unrecognized results from waitpid. We shouldn't > take on that responsibility when there are perfectly good solutions out > there already. That's a separate point that should be judged on its own merits. I don't have an educated opinion on how hard it would be, or how valuable it would be. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
