Re: We shouldn't signal process groups with SIGQUIT - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Nathan Bossart
Subject Re: We shouldn't signal process groups with SIGQUIT
Date
Msg-id 20230215181519.GA1353768@nathanxps13
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: We shouldn't signal process groups with SIGQUIT  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 10:12:58AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2023-02-15 09:57:41 -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> Oh, that's nifty.  Any reason not to enable send_abort_for_crash, too?
> 
> I think it'd be too noisy. Right now you get just a core dump of the crashed
> process, but if we set send_abort_for_crash we'd end up with a lot of core
> dumps, making it harder to know what to look at.
> 
> We should never need the send_abort_for_kill path, so I don't think the noise
> issue applies to the same degree.

Makes sense.

-- 
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Nathan Bossart
Date:
Subject: Re: Improve logging when using Huge Pages
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Minimal logical decoding on standbys