Re: autovacuum and immediate shutdown issues

From: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Brad Nicholson <bnichols(at)ca(dot)afilias(dot)info>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: autovacuum and immediate shutdown issues
Date: 2009-10-19 16:53:05
Message-ID: dcc563d10910190953n36d1229fx17a7744a71d6118e@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 10:44 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Brad Nicholson <bnichols(at)ca(dot)afilias(dot)info> writes:
>> On Mon, 2009-10-19 at 12:07 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> That seems like a fundamentally stupid idea, unless you are unconcerned
>>> with the time and cost of getting the DB running again, which seemingly
>>> you are.
>
>> I disagree that this is fundamentally stupid.  We are talking about a
>> situation where the server is about to die, HA solution kicks in and
>> moves it to standby.
>
> Moving it to standby immediately is a good idea, but it does not follow
> that you need to hit the DB over the head with a hammer.  A fast-mode
> shutdown seems perfectly adequate.  If it isn't, you're going to need
> nontrivial recovery effort anyhow.

All of this is completely besides the point that a database that's
been shutdown immediately / had the power cord yanked comes back up
and doesn't start autovacuuming automatically, which seems a
non-optimal behaviour.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Brad Nicholson 2009-10-19 17:06:35 Re: autovacuum and immediate shutdown issues
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-10-19 16:44:15 Re: autovacuum and immediate shutdown issues