Re: SIGTERM/FATAL error

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SIGTERM/FATAL error
Date: 2001-03-12 01:11:59
Message-ID: 200103120111.UAA24166@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Also, what signal should people send to a backend to kill just that
> > backend?
>
> I don't know that we do or should recommend such a thing at all ...
> but SIGTERM should work if anything does (and it is, not coincidentally,
> the default kind of signal for kill(1)).
>
> > In my reading of the code, I see:
>
> > pqsignal(SIGTERM, die); /* cancel current query and exit */
> > pqsignal(SIGQUIT, die); /* could reassign this sig for another use */
>
> This is already obsolete ;=) ... I'm just waiting on Vadim's approval of
> my xlog mods before committing a change in SIGQUIT handling --- see
> discussion a couple days ago.

Yes, I knew that was coming, so I sayed with SIGTERM because it should
work on 7.0 and 7.1.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hiroshi Inoue 2001-03-12 01:33:06 Re: SIGTERM/FATAL error
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-03-12 01:10:26 Re: SIGTERM/FATAL error