| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] Should we fix postmaster to avoid slow shutdown? |
| Date: | 2016-09-20 14:58:11 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoY8qQ9AEGy6XgZSLggJyjKk+Gkn4vOnTW3vfHXS=wWoSA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 2:20 AM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki
<tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
> There's no apparent evidence to indicate the cause, but I could guess a few reasons. What do you think these are correct and should fix PostgreSQL? (I think so)
I think that we shouldn't start changing things based on guesses about
what the problem is, even if they're fairly smart guesses. The thing
to do would be to construct a test rig, crash the server repeatedly,
and add debugging instrumentation to figure out where the time is
actually going.
I do think your theory about the stats collector might be worth
pursuing. It seems that the stats collector only responds to SIGQUIT,
ignoring SIGTERM. Making it do a clean shutdown on SIGTERM and a fast
exit on SIGQUIT seems possibly worthwhile.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-09-20 14:58:17 | Re: Parallel sec scan in plpgsql |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-09-20 14:46:39 | Re: [PATCH] Transaction traceability - txid_status(bigint) |