Re: SIGTERM/FATAL error

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I am using the SIGTERM in my administration application to allow
> administrators to kill individual backends. That is why I noticed the
> message.

Hm. Of course the backend cannot tell the difference between this use
of SIGTERM and its normal use for system shutdown. Maybe we could
come up with a compromise message --- although I suspect a compromise
would just be more confusing.

A more significant issue is whether it's really a good idea to start
encouraging dbadmins to go around killing individual backends. I think
this is likely to be a Bad Idea (tm). We have no experience (that I know
of) with applying SIGTERM for any other purpose than system shutdown or
forced restart. Are you really prepared to guarantee that shared memory
will always be left in a consistent state? That there will be no locks
left locked, etc?

regards, tom lane