On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 7:43 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
>> This whole discussion seems to be about making it easier to run SELECT
>> pg_cancel_backend(pid) FROM pg_stat_activity;. But that shouldn't be
>> made easier! If anything harder.
>
> Indeed. I find it hard to believe that there's a real problem here, and
> I absolutely will resist breaking backwards compatibility to solve it.
+1. Reading this thread I don't see why there is actually a problem...
The whole discussion is about moving the check at SQL-level with
pg_backend_pid(), that people are used to for a couple of releases
now, into pg_cancel_backend() or within a new function. I am not
really convinced that it is worth having a new interface for that.
--
Michael