Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> It looks to me like the reason for it is simply not having bothered to
>> copy the rw->rw_worker data to somewhere that would survive deletion
>> of the PostmasterContext. I wonder though if anyone remembers a more
>> fundamental reason? Surely the bgworker is not supposed to touch any
>> of the rest of the BackgroundWorkerList?
> I just checked BDR, which is the more complex code using workers I know
> of, and I don't see any reason why this cannot be changed.
The attached patch passes "make check-world" for me. Can you check it
against BDR?
(I'd be hesitant to back-patch it in any case, but I think it's okay for
HEAD unless we can easily find something it breaks.)
regards, tom lane
diff --git a/src/backend/postmaster/postmaster.c b/src/backend/postmaster/postmaster.c
index 19d11e0..e48703a 100644
*** a/src/backend/postmaster/postmaster.c
--- b/src/backend/postmaster/postmaster.c
*************** do_start_bgworker(RegisteredBgWorker *rw
*** 5529,5537 ****
/* Close the postmaster's sockets */
ClosePostmasterPorts(false);
! /* Do NOT release postmaster's working memory context */
- MyBgworkerEntry = &rw->rw_worker;
StartBackgroundWorker();
break;
#endif
--- 5529,5547 ----
/* Close the postmaster's sockets */
ClosePostmasterPorts(false);
! /*
! * Before blowing away PostmasterContext, save this bgworker's
! * data where it can find it.
! */
! MyBgworkerEntry = (BackgroundWorker *)
! MemoryContextAlloc(TopMemoryContext, sizeof(BackgroundWorker));
! memcpy(MyBgworkerEntry, &rw->rw_worker, sizeof(BackgroundWorker));
!
! /* Release postmaster's working memory context */
! MemoryContextSwitchTo(TopMemoryContext);
! MemoryContextDelete(PostmasterContext);
! PostmasterContext = NULL;
StartBackgroundWorker();
break;
#endif
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
