Re: BackendKeyData is mandatory?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BackendKeyData is mandatory? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4089897.1750708090@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BackendKeyData is mandatory? (Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres@jeltef.nl>) |
Ответы |
Re: BackendKeyData is mandatory?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres@jeltef.nl> writes: > On Mon, 23 Jun 2025 at 18:42, Jacob Champion > <jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >> From reading this thread, I'm not convinced that's "clear". I wouldn't >> have chosen the existing behavior, for sure, but any existing servers >> that don't send a key must be doing _something_ with that cancel >> request, right? Even if it's just ignored? > I mean if the only thing a server can do is ignore it, ISTM that it's > clearly useless to send it anyway. Sending nothing seems a much better > choice in that case. It could be that the server has some independent way of knowing which session to cancel. (As a reductio-ad-absurdum case, maybe it only supports one session.) >> Do we know which implementations aren't sending keys? > Nope, that's totally unclear. It would be very nice knowing which > database this is, and if it's at all a production system. Yeah, I'm very hesitant to spend any effort here without having a more concrete use-case. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: