> Killing an individual backend with SIGTERM is bad luck.  The backend
> will assume that it's being killed by the postmaster, and will exit
> without a whole lot of concern for cleaning up shared memory --- the

What code will be returned to postmaster in this case?

Vadim

Mon, 8 Jan 2001 22:26:43 -0800 
"Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM>
RE: Quite strange crash 
"Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM> writes:
>> Killing an individual backend with SIGTERM is bad luck.  The backend
>> will assume that it's being killed by the postmaster, and will exit
>> without a whole lot of concern for cleaning up shared memory --- the

> What code will be returned to postmaster in this case?

Right at the moment, the backend will exit with status 0.  I think you
are thinking the same thing I am: maybe a backend that receives SIGTERM
ought to exit with nonzero status.

That would mean that killing an individual backend would instantly
translate into an installation-wide restart.  I am not sure whether
that's a good idea.  Perhaps this cure is worse than the disease.
Comments anyone?

			regards, tom lane

Tue, 09 Jan 2001 01:40:49 -0500
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Quite strange crash 