Re: elog(FATAL) vs shared memory
От | Stuart Bishop |
---|---|
Тема | Re: elog(FATAL) vs shared memory |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 461E30CF.4040800@canonical.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: elog(FATAL) vs shared memory (Jim Nasby <decibel@decibel.org>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Jim Nasby wrote: > On Apr 11, 2007, at 6:23 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: >> FWIW, you might want to put some safeguards in there so that you don't >> try to inadvertently kill the backend that's running that function... >> unfortunately I don't think there's a built-in function to tell you >> the PID of the backend you're connected to; if you're connecting via >> TCP you could use inet_client_addr() and inet_client_port(), but that >> won't work if you're using the socket to connect. > > *wipes egg off face* > > There is a pg_backend_pid() function, even if it's not documented with > the other functions (it's in the stats function stuff for some reason). eh. No worries - my safeguard is just a comment saying 'don't connect to the same database you are killing the connections of' :-) -- Stuart Bishop <stuart.bishop@canonical.com> http://www.canonical.com/ Canonical Ltd. http://www.ubuntu.com/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: