Re: Followup comment for bug report 'postmaster ignores SIGPIPE' [was: Bug#255208: Would help with client aborts, too.]

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: Followup comment for bug report 'postmaster ignores SIGPIPE' [was: Bug#255208: Would help with client aborts, too.]
Дата
Msg-id 26643.1143390827@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Followup comment for bug report 'postmaster ignores SIGPIPE' [was: Bug#255208: Would help with client aborts, too.]  (Martin Pitt <martin@piware.de>)
Ответы Re: Followup comment for bug report 'postmaster ignores SIGPIPE' [was: Bug#255208: Would help with client aborts, too.]  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Список pgsql-bugs
Martin Pitt <martin@piware.de> writes:
> The bug trail in [1] contains a followup from Tom that ignoring
> SIGPIPE is specifically intended. Is there any document which states
> the reason for that?

Allowing SIGPIPE to kill the backend is completely infeasible, as the
backend would be unable to release locks etc before dying.

We have occasionally talked about faking a QueryCancel if we notice
a write failure while sending to the client.  Can't remember at the
moment what the outcome of those discussions was (ie, was there a
good reason not to) --- check the archives.

One point is that doing so doesn't help for queries that aren't
generating a lot of output, eg, updates/deletes.

            regards, tom lane

В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Martin Pitt
Дата:
Сообщение: Followup comment for bug report 'postmaster ignores SIGPIPE' [was: Bug#255208: Would help with client aborts, too.]
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Fwd: Bug#358546: failure of pg_ctl start -w -D