Re: SIGHUP not received by custom bgworkers if postmaster is notified - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: SIGHUP not received by custom bgworkers if postmaster is notified
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqRSKi0SqAbD0VQOfqXzQfSMZnjCwoGOuDkEGT7brGFt5g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread
In response to Re: SIGHUP not received by custom bgworkers if postmaster is notified  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Thanks for committing the fix!

On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 4:11 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
Michael Paquier escribió:
> Hi all,
>
> Please find attached a simple example of bgworker that logs a message each
> time a SIGTERM or SIGHUP signal is received by it:
> - "hello signal: processed SIGHUP" when SIGHUP is handled by my example
> - "hello signal: processed SIGTERM" when SIGTERM is handled by my example

I committed some improvements to worker_spi this morning that I think
enough demostrate signal handling capabilities, which I think is what
your submitted code would do.  If you see more use for a separate body
of sample worker code, by all means do submit that.
Sure.
--
Michael

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: [sepgsql 3/3] Add db_procedure:execute permission checks
Next
From: Gurjeet Singh
Date:
Subject: synchronize_seqscans' description is a bit misleading