Re: Postgres 10.1 fails to start: server did not start in time

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>
Cc: "Peter J(dot) Holzer" <hjp-pgsql(at)hjp(dot)at>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, Adam Brusselback <adambrusselback(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Postgres 10.1 fails to start: server did not start in time
Date: 2017-11-12 19:06:45
Message-ID: 20802.1510513605@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org> writes:
> Re: Peter J. Holzer 2017-11-12 <20171112173559(dot)m6chmbyf4vz6fu3c(at)hjp(dot)at>
>> Wouldn't it be better to remove the timeout?

> If you don't want to block, don't depend on the database service. That
> question is independent from the timeout.

Agreed, but I think Peter has a point: why is there a timeout at all,
let alone one as short as 30 seconds? Since systemd doesn't serialize
service starts unnecessarily, there seems little value in giving up
quickly. And we know that cases such as crash recovery may take more
than that.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Karsten Hilbert 2017-11-12 19:13:23 Re: pg on Debian servers
Previous Message Christoph Berg 2017-11-12 18:52:34 Re: Postgres 10.1 fails to start: server did not start in time