Re: Hot Standy introduced problem with query cancel behavior - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

On Tuesday 29 December 2009 16:22:54 Tom Lane wrote:
> Joachim Wieland <joe@mcknight.de> writes:
> > If we use the same signal for both cases, the receiving backend cannot
> > tell what the intention of the sending backend was. That's why I
> > proposed to make SIGINT similar to SIGUSR1 where we write a reason to
> > a shared memory structure first and then send the signal (see
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-12/msg02067.php from
> > a few days ago).
> This seems like a fairly bad idea.  One of the intended use-cases is to
> be able to manually "kill -INT" a misbehaving backend.  Assuming that
> there will be valid info about the signal in shared memory will break
> that.
Well. That already is the case now. MyProc->recoveryConflictMode is checked to 
recognize what kind of conflict is being resolved...

Andres