From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: HS/SR and smart shutdown |
Date: | 2010-03-04 12:11:36 |
Message-ID: | 3f0b79eb1003040411q29effbe5ld0a4801a95d988bc@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 11:49 AM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> HOWEVER, I do believe this is an issue we could live with for 9.0 if
>>> it's going to lead to a whole lot of additional debugging of SR. But if
>>> it's an easy fix, it'll avoid a lot of complaints on pgsql-general.
>>
>> I think that the latter statement is right.
>
> Though we've not reached consensus on smart shutdown during
> recovery yet, I wrote the patch that changes its behavior:
> shut down the server (including the startup process and the
> walreceiver) as soon as all read-only connections have died.
> The code is also available in the 'replication' branch in
> my git repository.
>
> And, let's discuss whether something like the attached patch
> is required for v9.0 or not.
There is no post about this for over a month. Can I remove this
from TODO item of SR for 9.0? Thought? Objection?
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2010-03-04 12:48:18 | Re: problem about inet |
Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2010-03-04 12:00:33 | Re: Incrementally Updated Backups and restartpoints |