Re: Should we improve "PID XXXX is not a PostgreSQL server process" warning for pg_terminate_backend(<<postmaster_pid>>)?

From: "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>
To: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Should we improve "PID XXXX is not a PostgreSQL server process" warning for pg_terminate_backend(<<postmaster_pid>>)?
Date: 2021-12-07 22:47:18
Message-ID: 52DA3827-E459-4C54-A603-B3C2C3418732@amazon.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 11/18/21, 8:27 PM, "Bharath Rupireddy" <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Here's the v4 patch with the above changes, the output looks like [1].
> Please review it further.

I agree with Tom. I would just s/server/backend/ (as per the
attached) and call it a day.

Nathan

Attachment Content-Type Size
v5-0001-improve-warning-message-in-pg_signal_backend.patch application/octet-stream 1.5 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2021-12-07 22:55:02 Re: RecoveryInProgress() has critical side effects
Previous Message Justin Pryzby 2021-12-07 22:37:04 Re: Is there a way (except from server logs) to know the kind of on-going/last checkpoint?