From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
Cc: | "David Fetter" <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, "PG Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: kill -KILL: What happens? |
Date: | 2011-01-13 18:38:26 |
Message-ID: | 20488.1294943906@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> At least on Unix I don't believe there is any other solution. You
>> could try looking at ps output but there's a fundamental race
>> condition, ie the postmaster could spawn another child just before
>> you kill it, whereupon the child is reassigned to init and there's
>> no longer a good way to tell that it came from that postmaster.
> Couldn't you run `ps auxf` and kill any postgres process which is
> not functioning as postmaster (those are pretty easy to distinguish)
> and which isn't the child of such a process? Is there ever a reason
> to allow such an orphan to run?
That's not terribly hard to do by hand, especially since the cautious
DBA could also do things like checking a process' CWD to verify which
postmaster it had belonged to. I can't see automating it though.
We already have a perfectly good solution to the automated shutdown
problem.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2011-01-13 18:45:07 | Re: kill -KILL: What happens? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-01-13 18:24:38 | Re: Bug in pg_describe_object, patch v2 |