Re: Hot Standy introduced problem with query cancel behavior
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Hot Standy introduced problem with query cancel behavior |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 23413.1262100174@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Hot Standy introduced problem with query cancel behavior (Joachim Wieland <joe@mcknight.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: Hot Standy introduced problem with query cancel behavior
Re: Hot Standy introduced problem with query cancel behavior |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Joachim Wieland <joe@mcknight.de> writes: > If we use the same signal for both cases, the receiving backend cannot > tell what the intention of the sending backend was. That's why I > proposed to make SIGINT similar to SIGUSR1 where we write a reason to > a shared memory structure first and then send the signal (see > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-12/msg02067.php from > a few days ago). This seems like a fairly bad idea. One of the intended use-cases is to be able to manually "kill -INT" a misbehaving backend. Assuming that there will be valid info about the signal in shared memory will break that. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: