Tom Lane writes:
> I think this is fairly irrelevant, because a not-yet-backend should
> have a fairly short timeout (a few seconds) before just shutting
> down anyway, so that malfunctioning clients can't cause denial of
> service; the particular case you mention is just one scenario.
I have a note here about an authentication timeout on the order of a few
minutes. You never know what sort of things PAM or Kerberos can go
through behind the scenes.
> OTOH, it'd be easy enough to turn on SIGTERM/SIGQUIT too, if you
> think there's really any value in it.
I think that would be reasonable.
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net http://funkturm.homeip.net/~peter
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2001-08-22 16:03:33|
|Subject: Re: A fixed user id for the postgres user?|
|Previous:||From: Oleg Bartunov||Date: 2001-08-22 15:53:58|
|Subject: Re: GiST patches for 7.2 (please apply) |