Re: why not kill -9 postmaster

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Andreas Seltenreich
Тема Re: why not kill -9 postmaster
Дата
Msg-id 87y7rb2nnb.fsf@gate450.dyndns.org
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: why not kill -9 postmaster  (Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net>)
Ответы Re: why not kill -9 postmaster  (Shane Ambler <pgsql@007Marketing.com>)
Список pgsql-general
Ron Johnson writes:

> On 10/20/06 05:27, Andreas Seltenreich wrote:
>> ,----[ <http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/static/postmaster-shutdown.html#AEN18182> ]
>> | It is best not to use SIGKILL to shut down the server. Doing so will
>> | prevent the server from releasing shared memory and semaphores,
>> | which may then have to be done manually before a new server can be
>> | started. Furthermore, SIGKILL kills the postmaster process without
>> | letting it relay the signal to its subprocesses, so it will be
>> | necessary to kill the individual subprocesses by hand as well.
>> `----
>
> But it can't be fatal, can it?

While it could be fixed by hand, the list archives tell that it was
fatal enough for some to shoot themselves in their feet.

> After all, that's what a system crash is, right?

A system crash is safer in that it won't leave orphaned child
processes or IPC/synchronization resources around, making it more
comparable to a SIGQUIT than a SIGKILL.

regards,
andreas

Вложения

В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Uyelik
Дата:
Сообщение: Where is the pg_terminate_backend() function? Way to execute shell cmd
Следующее
От: Ron Peterson
Дата:
Сообщение: c function returning high resolution timestamp