From: | Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com |
Subject: | Re: How to know killed by pg_terminate_backend |
Date: | 2011-01-21 10:13:32 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTimQKz57UWmJE=s=_M9w3E3YGb_i_h0KwSu-BMJV@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 13:56, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
>> Here is the patch to implement the feature.
>>
>> 1) pg_terminate_backend() sends SIGUSR1 signal rather than SIGTERM to
>> the target backend.
>> 2) The infrastructure used for message passing is
>> storage/ipc/procsignal.c The new message type for ProcSignalReason
>> is "PROCSIG_TERMNINATE_BACKEND_INTERRUPT"
>> 3) I assign new error code 57P04 which is returned from the backend
>> killed by pg_terminate_backend().
>>
>> #define ERRCODE_TERMINATE_BACKEND MAKE_SQLSTATE('5','7', 'P','0','4')
>
> Anyone has better idea? Tom dislikes my patch but I don't know how to
> deal with it.
There was another design in the past discussion:
>> One idea is postmaster sets a flag in the shared memory area
>> indicating it rceived SIGTERM before forwarding the signal to
>> backends.
Is it enough for your purpose and do we think it is more robust way?
--
Itagaki Takahiro
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2011-01-21 10:24:02 | Re: Is there a way to build PostgreSQL client libraries with MinGW |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2011-01-21 10:00:54 | Re: SSI and Hot Standby |