Brian Hurt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I just finished giving someone the standard advice to wait a bit before
>> trying to drop a database that'd just been accessed:

> Is this a synchronization issue?

The problem is that the user thinks his previous disconnect is finished
when it may not be --- it's entirely possible in fact that his old
backend hasn't even received the disconnect message yet.  So I don't
think it's possible to rely on there being a state change inside the
database indicating that the other guy is about to exit.

Even if we had a semaphore of the sort you suggest, I doubt people would
want DROP DATABASE to wait indefinitely.  The real question here is how
long is it reasonable for DROP DATABASE to wait before failing ...

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to