Re: [HACKERS] Terminating a backend

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Terminating a backend
Date: 2008-04-12 16:02:19
Message-ID: 16439.1208016139@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
>> When we get the termination signal, why can't we just set a global
>> boolean, do a query cancel, and in the setjmp() code block check the
>> global and exit --- at that stage we know we have released all locks and
>> can exit cleanly.

> I have implemented this idea with the attached patch.

It was already explained to you why this is a bad idea.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2008-04-12 16:18:34 Re: [HACKERS] Terminating a backend
Previous Message Tom Lane 2008-04-12 16:00:38 Re: runtime error on SPGIST, needed help

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2008-04-12 16:18:34 Re: [HACKERS] Terminating a backend
Previous Message Tom Lane 2008-04-12 15:52:00 Re: libpq patch for pqtypes hook api and PGresult creation