| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi |
| Subject: | Re: Proof of concept: standalone backend with full FE/BE protocol |
| Date: | 2012-09-04 05:30:28 |
| Message-ID: | 201209040730.28441.andres@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tuesday, September 04, 2012 06:20:59 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > I can see why that would be nice, but is it really realistic? Don't we
> > expect some more diligence in applications using this against letting
> > such a child continue to run after ctrl-c/SIGTERMing e.g. pg_dump in
> > comparison to closing a normal database connection?
>
> Er, what? If you kill the client, the child postgres will see
> connection closure and will shut down. I already tested that with the
> POC patch, it worked fine.
Well, but that will make scripting harder because you cannot start another
single backend pg_dump before the old backend noticed it, checkpointed and
shut down.
Andres
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2012-09-04 07:21:02 | Re: Some whitespaces in utility.c |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2012-09-04 04:57:37 | Some whitespaces in utility.c |