| From: | Dmitry Astapov <dastapov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #17698: On SIGTERM, psql terminates, but leaves the statement running |
| Date: | 2023-01-16 19:44:36 |
| Message-ID: | CAFQUnFgYi4+ySU-D4w1v3zeMTsjSymbc5VF+KRvnoRZ01K99-g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 3:21 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
wrote:
> On 2022-Nov-25, PG Bug reporting form wrote:
> >
> > Perhaps psql could have a SIGTERM handler that does roughly what
> > SIGINT handler does before terminating the whole process, and would
> > cancel the current statement (if any)?
>
> Sure. I doubt we want to wait until a reply to the cancel request is
> obtained, but we could have the sigterm handler at least send it before
> terminating.
>
> Why do you send SIGTERM to psql anyway?
>
>
The way the story was told to me by the user, they started psql from inside
the neovim session and then cancelled it with Ctrl-C. Apparently, neovim
(unlike, say, vim) sends SIGTERM to the child process in this case (whereas
vim will send SIGINT).
--
D. Astapov
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2023-01-16 20:34:51 | Re: BUG #17698: On SIGTERM, psql terminates, but leaves the statement running |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2023-01-16 15:31:04 | Re: BUG #17741: vacuum process hangs after pg_surgery manipulations |