Re: How many postmasters should be running? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: How many postmasters should be running?
Date
Msg-id 16914.1141150463@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: How many postmasters should be running?  ("Stock, Stuart" <Stuart.Stock@DrKW.com>)
List pgsql-general
"Stock, Stuart" <Stuart.Stock@DrKW.com> writes:
> Perhaps I'm just seeing a moment-in-time snapshot of the postmaster
> fork()'ing to handle these connections, but because they were rejected, it
> never had time to rename itself to 'postgres'?

There's definitely a short window between the fork and the point where
the child process is able to change the way it appears in ps.
[ eyes code... ]  In particular, if you have log_hostname enabled,
it looks like we could wait for a DNS response (to the lookup of the
client IP address) before we change the ps status.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "Stock, Stuart"
Date:
Subject: Re: How many postmasters should be running?
Next
From: Pelle Johansson
Date:
Subject: PQisBusy returns true but no more data is received.