On 20 October 2015 23:34, Robert Haas [mailto:robertmh...@gmail.com] Wrote:
>On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Alvaro Herrera
><alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> Robert Haas wrote:
>>> I don't think that proc_exit(1) is the right way to exit here. It's
>>> not very friendly to exit without at least attempting to give the
>>> client a clue about what has gone wrong. I suggest something like
>>> this:
>>>
>>> ereport(FATAL,
>>> (errcode(ERRCODE_ADMIN_SHUTDOWN),
>>> errmsg("terminating connection due to postmaster
>>> shutdown")));
>>
>> Agreed, but I don't think "shutdown" is the right word to use here --
>> that makes it sound like it was orderly. Perhaps "crash"?
>
>Well, that's a little speculative. "due to unexpected postmaster exit"?
Agreed. Attached is the patch with changes.
Thanks and Regards,
Kumar Rajeev Rastogi
dangling_backend_process_v2.patch
Description: dangling_backend_process_v2.patch
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
