Re: TerminateOtherDBBackends code comments inconsistency. - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: TerminateOtherDBBackends code comments inconsistency.
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1LTdwUma_i9=s4-aSkeu+p1cfREMPh6mcayHncN+L=RaQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: TerminateOtherDBBackends code comments inconsistency.  (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>)
Responses Re: TerminateOtherDBBackends code comments inconsistency.
Re: TerminateOtherDBBackends code comments inconsistency.
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 2:58 AM Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 10:18:35AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 9:56 PM Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote:
>
> > 3a9b18b309 didn't change the docs of pg_terminate_backend and whatever
> > is mentioned w.r.t permissions in the doc of that function sounds
> > valid for drop database force to me. Do you have any specific proposal
> > in your mind?
>
> Something like the attached.
>

LGTM.

>  One could argue the function should also check
> isBackgroundWorker and ignore even bgworkers that set proc->roleId, but I've
> not done that.

What is the argument for ignoring such workers?

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_trgm comparison bug on cross-architecture replication due to different char implementation
Next
From: shveta malik
Date:
Subject: Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby