Andrew Dunstan <[email protected]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Ick. Is it possible that the postmaster did get a report, but thought
>> it was normal session termination? If so, how could we distinguish?
> If that were the case then it would not have the dead process still
> listed as a live backend, ISTM, which it does.
The postmaster does not control the content of the pg_stat_activity
view.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
