From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: shawncarter@onboardeng.com
cc: pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #18734: pg_terminate_backend was unresponsive for processes
 with the status "active"
In-reply-to: <18734-3dfe0282d2e102c2@postgresql.org>
References: <18734-3dfe0282d2e102c2@postgresql.org>
Comments: In-reply-to PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org>
	message dated "Wed, 04 Dec 2024 23:55:49 +0000"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <2567617.1733422023.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2024 13:07:03 -0500
Message-ID: <2567618.1733422023@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2567618.1733422023%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org> writes:
> pg_terminate_backend failed to terminate active queries on a materialized
> view until an "idle in transaction" backend tied to the same view was
> terminated.

Can't do much with this report if you don't give a full recipe for
reproducing it.

I guessed that the problem might be "the termination isn't effective
while the session is blocked on a lock", but in an experiment here
that worked for me.  So I have no idea what was happening in
your case.

			regards, tom lane