From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Rajeev rastogi <rajeev(dot)rastogi(at)huawei(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Dangling Client Backend Process |
Date: | 2015-10-20 18:04:15 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYxMqLqZWFRoD++YCr7WZv=nADu8TZ96uavjX9nEDs2Ag@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>> I don't think that proc_exit(1) is the right way to exit here. It's
>> not very friendly to exit without at least attempting to give the
>> client a clue about what has gone wrong. I suggest something like
>> this:
>>
>> ereport(FATAL,
>> (errcode(ERRCODE_ADMIN_SHUTDOWN),
>> errmsg("terminating connection due to postmaster shutdown")));
>
> Agreed, but I don't think "shutdown" is the right word to use here --
> that makes it sound like it was orderly. Perhaps "crash"?
Well, that's a little speculative. "due to unexpected postmaster exit"?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2015-10-20 18:05:57 | Re: [PATCH] SQL function to report log message |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2015-10-20 18:03:35 | Re: Multi-column distinctness. |