Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> How do people feel about adding a single handler to 7.1? Is it
> something I can slip into the current CVS, or will it have to exist as a
> patch to 7.1. Seems it would be pretty isolated unless someone sends
> the signal, but it is clearly a feature addition.
> OK, I will distribute it as a patch.
Patch or otherwise, this approach seems totally unworkable. A signal
handler cannot do I/O safely, it cannot look at shared memory safely,
it cannot even look at the backend's own internal state safely. How's
it going to do any useful status reporting?
Firing up a separate backend process that looks at shared memory seems
like a more useful design in the long run. That will mean exporting
more per-backend status into shared memory, however, and that means that
this is not a trivial change.
regards, tom lane