Re: killing process question

From: "Shridhar Daithankar" <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in>
To: "'pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: killing process question
Date: 2002-09-19 15:28:29
Message-ID: 3D8A3A75.14264.14889ACB@localhost
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

On 19 Sep 2002 at 11:19, Johnson, Shaunn wrote:

>
> --howdy:
> --not that the process is doing a lot or taking up
> --a lot of resources, it's just something
> --that i allow the users to kill and then
> --it get's passed to me for correction if the
> --simple 'kill <pid>' thing doesn't work.
> --what i'm trying to understand is if there
> --is a way to do this without having to restart
> --the database (remember, it's still production)
> --everytime there is a runaway process AND not
> --kill -9 <pid>.
> --how can i do this?

I did a quick 'grep -rin' on postgresql source code I have(CVS, a week old).
Looks like postgresql backend is ignoring the SISPIPE which is delivered to
backend process when other end is closed. Obviously this is going to cause
hanging back-ends.

I guess a backend should terminate as if connection is closed. What say?

Bye
Shridhar

--
Guillotine, n.: A French chopping center.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message phil young 2002-09-19 15:35:01 rpm with locale enabled
Previous Message Johnson, Shaunn 2002-09-19 15:19:03 Re: killing process question

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ross J. Reedstrom 2002-09-19 15:30:51 Re: Proposal for resolving casting issues
Previous Message Johnson, Shaunn 2002-09-19 15:19:03 Re: killing process question