Re: Change pg_cancel_*() to ignore current backend
От | Fabrízio de Royes Mello |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Change pg_cancel_*() to ignore current backend |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAFcNs+pmna0FpOzdV1itZ+PXdbmxaU7CMa42JZnnJAD=Mq=hSQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Change pg_cancel_*() to ignore current backend (Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Change pg_cancel_*() to ignore current backend
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Em terça-feira, 19 de maio de 2015, Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com> escreveu:
On 5/19/15 6:30 PM, David G. Johnston wrote:On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 4:23 PM, Marko Tiikkaja <marko@joh.to
<mailto:marko@joh.to>>wrote:
On 2015-05-20 00:59, Jim Nasby wrote:
I find it annoying to have to specifically exclude
pg_backend_pid() from
pg_stat_activity if I'm trying to kill a bunch of backends at
once, and
I can't think of any reason why you'd ever want to call a
pg_cancel_*
function with your own PID.
That's a rather easy way of testing that you're handling FATAL
errors correctly from a driver/whatever.
I'm having trouble thinking of a PC name for the function we create that
should do this; while changing the pg_cancel_* functions to operate more
safely.
We could add a second parameter to the current functions: allow_own_pid DEFAULT false. To me that seems better than an entirely separate set of functions.
+1 to add a second parameter to current functions.
--
Fabrízio de Royes Mello
Consultoria/Coaching PostgreSQL
Consultoria/Coaching PostgreSQL
>> Timbira: http://www.timbira.com.br
>> Blog: http://fabriziomello.github.io
>> Linkedin: http://br.linkedin.com/in/fabriziomello
>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/fabriziomello
>> Blog: http://fabriziomello.github.io
>> Linkedin: http://br.linkedin.com/in/fabriziomello
>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/fabriziomello
>> Github: http://github.com/fabriziomello
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: