Re: why not kill -9 postmaster

Ron Johnson writes:

> On 10/20/06 05:27, Andreas Seltenreich wrote:
>> ,----[ <http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/static/postmaster-shutdown.html#AEN18182> ]
>> | It is best not to use SIGKILL to shut down the server. Doing so will
>> | prevent the server from releasing shared memory and semaphores,
>> | which may then have to be done manually before a new server can be
>> | started. Furthermore, SIGKILL kills the postmaster process without
>> | letting it relay the signal to its subprocesses, so it will be
>> | necessary to kill the individual subprocesses by hand as well.
>> `----
>
> But it can't be fatal, can it?

While it could be fixed by hand, the list archives tell that it was
fatal enough for some to shoot themselves in their feet.

> After all, that's what a system crash is, right?

A system crash is safer in that it won't leave orphaned child
processes or IPC/synchronization resources around, making it more
comparable to a SIGQUIT than a SIGKILL.

regards,
andreas