On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 6:49 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 6:19 AM, Piotr Stefaniak > <postg...@piotr-stefaniak.me> wrote: >>> while investigating the shm_mq code and its testing module I made some >>> cosmetic improvements there. You can see them in the attached diff file. >> >> Revised patch attached. > > The first hunk of this corrects an outdated comment, so we should > certainly apply that. I'm not seeing what the value of the other bits > is.
- proc_exit(1); + proc_exit(0); Looking again at this thread with fresh eyes, isn't the origin of the confusion the fact that we do need to have a non-zero error code so as the worker is never restarted thanks to BGW_NEVER_RESTART? Even with that, it is a strange concept to leave with proc_exit(1) in the case where a worker left correctly.. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
