On Fri, 2008-11-28 at 11:14 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> > After some thought, the way I would handle this is by sending a slightly
> > different kind of signal.
>
> > We can send a shared invalidation message which means "end the
> > transaction, whether or not you are currently running a statement".
>
> No, a thousand times no.
So you're against it? ;-)
> The sinval queue is an *utterly* inappropriate
> mechanism for such a thing.
To be honest, it did seem quite a neat solution. Any particular
direction of thought you'd like me to pursue instead?
Asking the backend to kill itself is much cleaner than the other ways I
imagined. So my other thoughts steer towards hijacking the SIGUSR1
signal somehow for my nefarious purposes. Would that way sound OK?
-- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.comPostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
