At Wed, 11 Sep 2019 01:36:15 +0000, "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa.takay@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote in
<0A3221C70F24FB45833433255569204D1FD33579@G01JPEXMBYT05>
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]
> > SIGTERM, which needs to be adjusted. For another, its
> > SIGQUIT handler does exit(1) not _exit(2), which seems rather
> > dubious ... should we make it more like the rest? I think
> > the reasoning there might've been that if some DBA decides to
> > SIGQUIT the archiver, we don't need to force a database-wide
> > reset; but why exactly should we tolerate that?
>
> postmaster doesn't distinguish return codes other than 0 for the archiver, and just starts the archiver unless
postmasteris shutting down. So we can use _exit(2) like the other children.
>
> Can't we use SIGKILL instead of SIGINT/SIGTERM to stop the grandchildren, just in case they are slow to respond to or
ignoreSIGINT/SIGTERM? That matches the idea of pg_ctl's immediate shutdown.
Perhaps +1.. immediate -> SIGKILL fast -> SIGTERM?
> (Windows cannot stop grandchildren because kill() in src/port/kill.c doesn't support the process group... That's a
separatetopic.)
reagards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center