Re: Server instrumentation for 8.1
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Server instrumentation for 8.1 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 330.1115907863@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Server instrumentation for 8.1 (Andrew - Supernews <andrew+nonews@supernews.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Server instrumentation for 8.1
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew - Supernews <andrew+nonews@supernews.com> writes: > What currently happens is that backends respond to kill -15 (_NOT_ -9) > by cleaning up and exiting. This code path is used for implementing the > stop -mfast option, which means that as it currently exists, the cleanup > only has to be good enough to let other backends get out of critical > sections and complete their own rollback-and-exit safely. Exactly. In theory it probably works fine to allow one backend to exit via kill -TERM, but it cannot be claimed that that behavior has been tested to any significant extent --- "fast" shutdown is not stressing it in the same way. I think this is largely a question of someone doing a significant amount of stress testing: gun live server processes with "kill -TERM" in an active system, and keep an eye out for resource leaks, held locks, and so on. It would be more convincing if the processes getting zapped are executing a wide variety of SQL, too --- I'd not feel very confident given only tests of killing, say, pgbench threads. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: