Re: [HACKERS] Function to kill backend
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Function to kill backend |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 10020.1090877796@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Function to kill backend (Oliver Jowett <oliver@opencloud.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Function to kill backend
|
Список | pgsql-patches |
Oliver Jowett <oliver@opencloud.com> writes: > What about implementing "kill" as "cancel then exit"? Does that > guarantee a safe exit in all cases? That was exactly what Bruce's patch turned it into. That would be workable if we separated this case from the existing elog(FATAL) behavior, but doing it that way is quite unsafe for real FATAL errors, and I do not think we want SIGTERM response to behave that way either. (When init SIGTERMs us, we do *not* want to lollygag around, we want to get the heck out of there so we can write a shutdown checkpoint before we get SIGKILL'd.) So what you'd basically need is a separate signal to trigger that sort of exit, which would be easy ... if we had any spare signal numbers. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: