On 2014-11-19 16:04:49 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote: > On 19 November 2014 15:57, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > On 2014-11-19 15:47:05 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote: > >> > Also, for the Shutdown itself, why are we not using > >> > kill(PostmasterPid, SIGINT)? > >> > >> Done > > > > I don't think that's ok. The postmaster is the one that should be in > > control, not some subprocess.
Just as an example why I think this is wrong: Some user could just trigger replication to resume and we'd be in some awkward state. > > I fail to see the win in simplicity over using exit (like we already do > > for the normal end of recovery!) is. The issue with the log line seems > > perfectly easily to avoid by just checking the exit code in > > postmaster.c. > > We need to be able to tell the difference between a crashed Startup > process and this usage. Exit code, as suggested above. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
