SIGQUIT vs SIGINT

From: Edwin Grubbs <edwin(at)grubbs(dot)org>
To: pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: SIGQUIT vs SIGINT
Date: 2012-11-06 21:03:07
Message-ID: CAAZm=o1sSz7yvGVoigPOALcJ44f6vC7EqNnE+Ygn9jA-CnF2PA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

Redhat cluster comes with a default configuration file for
postgres-8.4 that by default just sends a SIGQUIT to stop postgres.
I'm trying to convince Redhat support to use SIGINT instead of
SIGQUIT, so that postgres doesn't have to recover by replaying the WAL
file, but they are questioning whether recovery is actually a bad
thing.

I can't find any more information on why not to use SIGQUIT besides
the documentation indicating "This is recommended only in
emergencies." Can you provide any information on why their default
config should be changed? I can obviously edit my own server's config,
but I don't want anyone else to be hurt by this.

Here is the bug that I submitted. The comments that I have received
back are on the support ticket, so you can't see that.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871659

-Edwin

Responses

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Igor Neyman 2012-11-06 21:09:03 unlooged tables
Previous Message Lukasz Brodziak 2012-11-05 20:54:56 Re: Cannot take base backup of a master database