Re: Remove non-fast promotion Re: Should we remove a fallback promotion? take 2

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Remove non-fast promotion Re: Should we remove a fallback promotion? take 2
Date: 2020-04-21 05:54:28
Message-ID: 20200421055428.GD6436@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 02:27:20PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On 2020/04/21 10:59, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> With your patch, this code
>> now means that in order to finish recovery you need to send SIGUSR2 to
>> the startup process *and* to create the promote signal file.
>
> Yes, but isn't this the same as the way to trigger fast promotion in HEAD?

Yep, but my point is that some users who have been relying only on
SIGUSR2 sent to the startup process for a promotion may be surprised
to see that doing the same operation does not trigger a promotion
anymore.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kyotaro Horiguchi 2020-04-21 06:08:17 Re: [BUG] non archived WAL removed during production crash recovery
Previous Message Amit Khandekar 2020-04-21 05:37:21 pgbench testing with contention scenarios