>> >> Seems reasonable. Does the victim backend currently know why it has been
>> >> killed?
>> > I don't think so.
>> > One idea is postmaster sets a flag in the shared memory area
>> > indicating it rceived SIGTERM before forwarding the signal to
>> > backends.
>> > Backend check the flag and if it's not set, it knows that the signal
>> > has been sent by pg_terminate_backend(), not postmaster.
>> Or it could also be sent by some other user process, like the user
>> running "kill" from the shell.
> No problem (at least for pgpool-II).
> If the flag is not set, postgres returns the same code as the one
> killed by pg_terminate_backend(). The point is, backend is killed by
> postmaster or not. Because if backend was killed by postmaster,
> pgpool-II should not expect the PostgreSQL server is usable since
> postmaster decided to shutdown.
Here is the patch to implement the feature.
1) pg_terminate_backend() sends SIGUSR1 signal rather than SIGTERM to
the target backend.
2) The infrastructure used for message passing is
storage/ipc/procsignal.c The new message type for ProcSignalReason
3) I assign new error code 57P04 which is returned from the backend
killed by pg_terminate_backend().
#define ERRCODE_TERMINATE_BACKEND MAKE_SQLSTATE('5','7', 'P','0','4')
Comments are welcome.
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tatsuo Ishii||Date: 2011-01-02 14:01:59|
|Subject: Re: How to know killed by pg_terminate_backend|
|Previous:||From: Kevin Grittner||Date: 2011-01-02 13:47:01|
|Subject: Re: SSI SLRU low-level functions first cut|