From: | Paul Guo <pguo(at)pivotal(dot)io> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [Patch] Create a new session in postmaster by calling setsid() |
Date: | 2018-08-06 04:11:26 |
Message-ID: | CAEET0ZFy74SA-mrYN4pG76zujg__H2UKeNN-8ETX4-gnj5uwhQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 10:30 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Paul Guo <pguo(at)pivotal(dot)io> writes:
> > [ make the postmaster execute setsid() too ]
>
> I'm a bit skeptical of this proposal. Forcing the postmaster to
> dissociate from its controlling terminal is a good thing in some
> scenarios, but probably less good in others, and manual postmaster
> starts are probably mostly in the latter class.
>
> I wonder whether having "pg_ctl start" do a setsid() would accomplish
> the same result with less chance of breaking debugging usages.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
Yes, if considering the case of starting postmaster manually, we can not
create
a new session in postmaster, so pg_ctl seems to be a good place for setsid()
call. Attached a newer patch. Thanks.
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
0001-Create-a-new-session-for-postmaster-in-pg_ctl-by-cal.patch | application/octet-stream | 1.5 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2018-08-06 04:38:24 | Re: TupleTableSlot abstraction |
Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2018-08-06 03:22:34 | Allow postgres_fdw passwordless non-superuser conns with prior superuser permission |