Re: SIGQUIT on archiver child processes maybe not such a hot idea?

On 9/3/19 12:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> writes:
>> But now we know that sending it to grand-children is wrong in a
>> sense that that leads to left-alone unwanted core files. But the
>> behavior is already knwon at the time.
> 
>> So, Now I know that we need to revert that in certain extent if
>> we want to stop the core-dumping behavior...
> 
> Yeah.  After thinking about this more, I'm inclined to propose that
> we just change what the postmaster does, as per attached patch.
> 
> A couple of questions arise:
> 
> * Would it be better to substitute SIGTERM instead of SIGINT?
> The POSIX default handling is the same for both, but some programs
> might interpret them differently.

I prefer SIGTERM, but FWIW pgBackRest handles them both the same way.

-- 
-David
david@pgmasters.net