Re: Safely Killing Backends (Was: Applications that leak connections)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jim Wilson <jimw(at)kelcomaine(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Safely Killing Backends (Was: Applications that leak connections)
Date: 2005-02-04 22:44:41
Message-ID: 18146.1107557081@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Jim Wilson <jimw(at)kelcomaine(dot)com> writes:
> Rather than getting into the raised eyebrow thing ;-), I\\\'d suggest
> checking your "qualifiers". Consider that with Postgres, if killing a
> single connection brings the whole server down, you will loose _all_
> uncommitted data. If you did not, then I would call that a bug.

I would too. So what's your complaint exactly? That kill -9'ing one
backend takes out all your current uncommitted transactions and not just
the one? I don't regard that as data loss: uncommitted is uncommitted.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message phil campaigne 2005-02-04 23:51:37 Re: Duration between two timestamps
Previous Message Christopher Browne 2005-02-04 22:35:55 Re: error-tolerant COPY FROM