Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii@sra.co.jp> writes:
>> Regarding the "postmaster processes not going away" problem...
> What about adding KEEPALIVE option to the socket?
Of course, since whatever OS he's using on the client side is too broken
to notice that the socket is orphaned and close it, it might be so
broken as to respond to the keepalive pings :-(. Still, it'd be an easy
thing to try...
Even though the stated case sounds more like an OS bug than anything
else, setting KEEPALIVE on our TCP connections is probably still a good
idea. If the client machine were to crash completely then it wouldn't
be reasonable to expect it to close the connection, and we'd want to
have some method of ensuring that the connected backend shuts down
eventually. KEEPALIVE seems sufficiently low-overhead (and easy to
implement) to be the right answer for this scenario.
regards, tom lane