Re: transaction timeout - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Magnus Hagander
Subject Re: transaction timeout
Date
Msg-id 6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCE094619@algol.sollentuna.se
Whole thread Raw
In response to transaction timeout  (Dr NoName <spamacct11@yahoo.com>)
Responses Re: transaction timeout
List pgsql-general
> > > That said, I have seen some folks post about writing a
> perl or shell
> > > script that runs every x minutes looking for connections
> that have
> > > been idle for > a certain amount of time and kill the backend
> > > associated with it (sigterm, not -9...)
> >
> > what are the implications of killing a postmaster process?
>
> A Sigterm is generally considered safe.  It's -9 and its ilk
> that you need to be wary of.

No it's not. See the archives.
The only *safe* way to do it ATM is to restart the database. SIGTERM may
leave orphaned locks or such things in the system. (Incidentally, -9 on
a single backend should be safe I believe. The postmaster will tell all
concurrent connections to abort and restart. It's not nice, but it
should be safe - should perform onrmal recovery same as if you pull the
plug)


//Magnus

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Stewart
Date:
Subject: error when using SELECT
Next
From: Dr NoName
Date:
Subject: Re: transaction timeout