| From: | Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: failover vs. read only queries |
| Date: | 2010-06-09 09:13:13 |
| Message-ID: | 20100609181313.BD2C.52131E4D@oss.ntt.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> To fix the problem, when the trigger file is found, I think
> that we should cancel all the running read only queries
> immediately (or forcibly use -1 as the max_standby_delay
> since that point) and make the recovery go ahead.
Hmmm, does the following sequence work as your expect instead of the chanage?
It requires text-file manipulation in 1, but seems to be more flexible.
1. Reset max_standby_delay = 0 in postgresql.conf
2. pg_ctl reload
3. Create a trigger file
BTW, I hope we will have "pg_ctl failover --timeout=N" in 9.1
instead of the trigger file based management.
Regards,
---
Takahiro Itagaki
NTT Open Source Software Center
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2010-06-09 09:31:18 | Re: failover vs. read only queries |
| Previous Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2010-06-09 08:56:19 | Re: failover vs. read only queries |