information can I get about the current running backends on the
internal structures? Or do I have to ask the OS?
Thank you,
--
Paulo Scardine
- Original Message -
From: "Robert Treat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Killing the backend to cancel a long waiting
On Mon, 2003-09-22 at 13:53, Paulo Scardine wrote:
> I can implement it as C functions, I think.
> Would be nice to have something like:
>
> Test=# select pg_list_backends();
> pid | conn_id | user | database | time | host | status
> ---+--+--+---+
I can implement it as C functions, I think.
Would be nice to have something like:
Test=# select pg_list_backends();
pid | conn_id | user | database | time | host | status
---+--+--+---+--+---+
4724 | 35445134 | marcelo | test
It's rumoured that Christopher Kings-Lynne once said:
>> Wouldn't it be useful, though, to implement a "KILL" or "CANCEL" SQL
>> command that takes a backend ID as its argument (and, of course, does
>> the appropriate checks of whether you're a superuser or the owner of
>> the backend) and sends th
> Wouldn't it be useful, though, to implement a "KILL" or "CANCEL" SQL
> command that takes a backend ID as its argument (and, of course, does
> the appropriate checks of whether you're a superuser or the owner of
> the backend) and sends the appropriate signal to the target backend?
>
> That would
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Paulo Scardine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> I trust when you say "kill", you really mean "send SIGINT" ...
>
> > I'm sending a SIGTERM. Would SIGINT be more appropriate?
>
> Yes --- that would actually cancel the query, not cause the backend to
> shut down.
Ahh...this is
Paulo Scardine wrote:
>
> There are many interfaces that doesn't support canceling a long query other
> than killing the application or killing the backend using the server
> operational system.
>
> I've searched the docs, faqs and list archives; seen a lot of questions but
>
"Paulo Scardine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I trust when you say "kill", you really mean "send SIGINT" ...
> I'm sending a SIGTERM. Would SIGINT be more appropriate?
Yes --- that would actually cancel the query, not cause the backend to
shut down.
regards, tom lane
-
- Original Message -
From: "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ...
> I trust when you say "kill", you really mean "send SIGINT" ...
> ...
I'm sending a SIGTERM. Would SIGINT be more appropriate?
Thank you,
--
Paulo Scardine
---(end of broadcast)
"Paulo Scardine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So I hacked a small pggetpid and pgkillpid C functions, and now I can learn
> the backend's PID, start the query in a new thread, and kill the backend
> using another connection if I want.
I trust when you say "kill", you really mean "send SIGINT" ...
Paulo Scardine [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So I hacked a small pggetpid and pgkillpid C functions, and now I can
learn
the backend's PID, start the query in a new thread, and kill the backend
using another connection if I want. Its ugly, I know, but worked
wonderfully
with ODBC, the Delphi de
There are many interfaces that doesn't support canceling a long query other
than killing the application or killing the backend using the server
operational system.
I've searched the docs, faqs and list archives; seen a lot of questions but
no answers.
So I hacked a small pggetpid and pgkillpid C
12 matches
Mail list logo
