Re: pg_terminate_backend idea
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_terminate_backend idea |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20115.1119465568@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_terminate_backend idea (Andrew - Supernews <andrew+nonews@supernews.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew - Supernews <andrew+nonews@supernews.com> writes: > On 2005-06-22, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Andreas Pflug <pgadmin@pse-consulting.de> writes: >>> I've seen cancel *not* working. >> >> Even a moment's perusal of the code will prove that there is no >> situation in which a backend will respond to SIGTERM but not SIGINT > "idle in transaction". (or "idle" for that matter, but that's usually less > significant.) In that case there's no query to cancel, so I would dispute the claim that that constitutes "not working". QueryCancel is defined to cancel the current query, not necessarily to abort your whole transaction. (Before 8.0 there wasn't much of a difference, but now there is: QueryCancel is an ordinary error that can be trapped by a savepoint. Are you arguing it should not be so trappable?) regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: