Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Simplifying replication

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
Cc: "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, "Greg Stark" <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Simplifying replication
Date: 2010-10-27 19:38:17
Message-ID: 26115.1288208297@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> writes:
> Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Except that changing wal_keep_segments doesn't require restarting
>>> the master.
>> 
>> Our docs say that it does:
>> This parameter can only be set in the postgresql.conf file or on
>> the server command line.
 
> That sounds as though a reload would do it; I don't see that
> indicating that a restart is needed.

That is, in fact, our standard boilerplate wording for SIGHUP
parameters.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Joshua D. DrakeDate: 2010-10-27 19:40:12
Subject: Re: max_wal_senders must die
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-10-27 19:33:55
Subject: Re: max_wal_senders must die

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group