Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] Function to kill backend

From: Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com>
To: Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>,Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>,Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>,Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>,PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Function to kill backend
Date: 2004-07-26 21:22:33
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-patches
Andreas Pflug wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> If you don't mind plastering a "use at your own risk" sign on it, then
>> go for it.
> killing a backend is obviously much more "at your own risk" than a 
> descent function.


What about implementing "kill" as "cancel then exit"? Does that 
guarantee a safe exit in all cases?

It wouldn't catch *all* the cases where you want to kill a backend, just 
the ones where the backend is in a cancellable state, but it seems to me 
that the main usecase is killing an otherwise idle backend that the 
client doesn't want to let go of. And if the backend isn't cancellable 
for an extended period, you probably have other problems anyway.


In response to


pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-07-26 21:36:36
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Function to kill backend
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-07-26 21:01:30
Subject: Re: win32 version info

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group