Re: Function to kill backend - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Josh Berkus
Subject Re: Function to kill backend
Date
Msg-id 200404060922.19511.josh@agliodbs.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Function to kill backend  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Function to kill backend  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom,

> I don't think it's an open-and-shut decision as to whether people
> actually *need* to do session kills (as opposed to query/transaction
> kills).  The arguments presented so far are not convincing to my mind,
> certainly not convincing enough to buy into a commitment to do whatever
> it takes to support that.

Hmmm ... well, I can make a real-world case from my supported apps for 
transaction/statement kills.   But my support for session kills is just 
hypothetical; any  time I've had to kill off sessions, it's because I had to 
shut the database down, and that's better done from the command line.

My web apps which need to manage the number of connections do it through their 
connection pool.

So I would vote for Yes on SIGINT by XID, but No on SIGTERM by PID, if Tom 
thinks there will be any significant support & troubleshooting involved for 
the latter.

Unless, of course, someone can give us a real business case that they have 
actually encountered in production.

-- 
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: Function to kill backend
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Function to kill backend