Re: pg_ctl failover Re: Latches, signals, and waiting

From: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com
Cc: magnus(at)hagander(dot)net, heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_ctl failover Re: Latches, signals, and waiting
Date: 2011-01-31 03:35:47
Message-ID: 20110131.123547.671468322707979322.t-ishii@sraoss.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> If the "pg_ctl promote" patch will have been committed, I recommend that
> the C function should send the signal to the startup process rather than
> creating the trigger file. Because the trigger file is checked every for 5s,
> which would lengthen the failover time by an average 2.5s.

Ok, probably I could make the function smart enough to signal or not
by looking at the PostgreSQL version.

BTW is it possible to export following variable in xlog.c?

static char *TriggerFile = NULL;

That would make coding of the C function lot easier.
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
Japanese: http://www.sraoss.co.jp

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hitoshi Harada 2011-01-31 03:42:28 Re: Add ENCODING option to COPY
Previous Message Jeff Davis 2011-01-31 03:33:37 Re: SSI patch version 14