Re: elog(FATAL) vs shared memory - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jim Nasby
Subject Re: elog(FATAL) vs shared memory
Date
Msg-id DC5995BC-9E10-46B0-8084-4607274391DC@decibel.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: elog(FATAL) vs shared memory  (Jim Nasby <decibel@decibel.org>)
Responses Re: elog(FATAL) vs shared memory  (Stuart Bishop <stuart.bishop@canonical.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Apr 11, 2007, at 6:23 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
> FWIW, you might want to put some safeguards in there so that you  
> don't try to inadvertently kill the backend that's running that  
> function... unfortunately I don't think there's a built-in function  
> to tell you the PID of the backend you're connected to; if you're  
> connecting via TCP you could use inet_client_addr() and  
> inet_client_port(), but that won't work if you're using the socket  
> to connect.

*wipes egg off face*

There is a pg_backend_pid() function, even if it's not documented  
with the other functions (it's in the stats function stuff for some  
reason).
--
Jim Nasby                                            jim@nasby.net
EnterpriseDB      http://enterprisedb.com      512.569.9461 (cell)




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Merlin Moncure"
Date:
Subject: Re: Bug about column references within subqueries used in selects
Next
From: "Gurjeet Singh"
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] [Fwd: Index Advisor]