Re: windows doesn't notice backend death

Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>   
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>     
>>> Ick.  Is it possible that the postmaster did get a report, but thought
>>> it was normal session termination?  If so, how could we distinguish?
>>>       
>
>   
>> If that were the case then it would not have the dead process still 
>> listed as a live backend, ISTM, which it does.
>>     
>
> The postmaster does not control the content of the pg_stat_activity
> view.
>
>             
>   

Well, I'm not I know how to find out the answer to your question. I 
could try attaching a debugger to the postmaster - if I knew where to 
put a breakpoint.

cheers

andrew