Tom Lane wrote:
> > ftok() on pg_control or something in the clusters data directory was my
> > intention. (Again, just one message queue)
> Doesn't work; you have to be able to cope with collisions with
> previously existing queue IDs ... so in practice the queue ID has to
> be treated as quasi-random. See the semaphore ID selection logic
> we use now.
> I tend to agree with Bruce's nearby comment that we shouldn't be trying
> to solve this now. I'd vote for commenting out the session-kill
> function for 7.5, and revisiting the issue sometime in future.
I already have it on the TODO list.
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2004-07-29 17:03:02|
|Subject: Re: Point in Time Recovery|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2004-07-29 17:00:50|
|Subject: Re: more signals (was: Function to kill backend) |