Tom Lane wrote: > "Leon Mergen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On 7/8/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> It's actually not that easy to get out of the single-user mode without > >> it doing a checkpoint. I suppose you must have either SIGQUIT or > >> SIGKILL'd it. While there's nothing we can do about SIGKILL, it strikes > >> me that it might be a good safety measure if single-user mode treated > >> SIGQUIT the same as SIGTERM, ie, non-panic shutdown. Comments anyone? > > > What I found with SIGTERM was that it did nothing, since it was still > > waiting for the (single-user) client to exit, and thus had no effect > > unless I sent an end-of-input ctrl+d singal, which would have resulted > > in a shutdown anyway. > > We might need a bit of rejiggering around the edges of the single-user > command reading code to make this work nicely, but what I'm envisioning > is that a keyboard-generated SIGQUIT ought to result in a clean > shutdown, same as EOF does. > > At least on my machine there doesn't seem to be a defined way to > generate SIGTERM from the terminal; so I can see where if someone hasn't > read the postgres man page carefully, their first instinct upon finding > that control-C doesn't get them out of single-user mode might be to type > control-\ (or whatever the local QUIT character is). It doesn't seem > like it should be quite that easy to force a panic stop.
That seems reasonable, but I know an awful lot of people that don't know how to generate SIGQUIT at all (I only learned about it about a year ago, I think). In fact anyone who doesn't already know that Ctrl-D closes the session is not very likely to know about Ctrl-\. So while we should do it anyway, IMHO there's not much gain there. I think it may be good to add "exit" and "quit" commands to close the standalone session. -- Alvaro Herrera Developer, http://www.PostgreSQL.org/ "God is real, unless declared as int" ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster