From: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: A new function to wait for the backend exit after termination |
Date: | 2020-10-31 10:58:18 |
Message-ID: | CALj2ACUOp8eyOwmZM5YUF5xe=guEdOC_i8bZPKsezRR9-2_EAA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 6:41 PM Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> wrote:
>
> I prefer that false is returned when the timeout happens,
> like pg_promote() does.
>
Done.
>
> When the specified timeout is negative, the following error is thrown *after*
> SIGTERM is signaled to the target backend. This seems strange to me.
> The timeout value should be verified at the beginning of the function, instead.
>
> ERROR: timeout cannot be negative
>
I'm not throwing error for this case, instead a warning and returning
false. This is to keep it consistent with other cases such as the
given pid is not a backend pid.
Attaching the v3 patch. I tried to address the review comments
received so far and added documentation. I tested the patch locally
here. I saw that we don't have any test cases for existing
pg_terminate_backend(), do we need to add test cases into regression
suites for these two new functions?
Please review the v3 patch and let me know comments.
With Regards,
Bharath Rupireddy.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v3-0001-pg_terminate_backend-with-wait-timeout-and-pg_wai.patch | application/x-patch | 10.3 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | vignesh C | 2020-10-31 11:10:49 | Re: Log message for GSS connection is missing once connection authorization is successful. |
Previous Message | Andrey V. Lepikhov | 2020-10-31 09:26:29 | Re: Removing unneeded self joins |