Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > My guess is that this used to proc_exit the postgres backend, but now > > proc_exits the postmaster, but that is only a guess. > > No. This is post-fork (and had better remain so). The change causes > the sub-postmaster that has just finished handling a cancel request > to exit with nonzero status, which the postmaster then interprets > (correctly) as a child process crash. > > BTW, how are we going to do cancels in Windows-land? The sub-postmaster > isn't gonna have access to the postmaster's list of child PIDs and > cancel keys ...
When you say sub-postmaster, you mean we fork, then process the cancel request? Seems we might need special handling in there, yea. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
