On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 2:14 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> Greg Stark wrote:
>> On 7 Jan 2009, at 09:47, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>> > Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> >> It's required by the sync replication patch, but has no value
>> >> otherwise.
>> > Well, we have talked about allowing more signalling long-term, and
>> > this
>> > would accomplish that independent of the sync replication, so we might
>> > want to revisit this someday if it isn't included in sync replication.
>> I also needed this for the progress indicator patch. I used SIGQUIT
>> for the proof-of-concept patch but I wouldn't want to lose that signal
>> for real.
> Yep, we want multiplexed signals independent of sync replication.
The updated patch of multiplexing SIGUSR1 is included in v5 of
synch-rep patch. (01_signal_handling.patch)
This patch can be also reviewed independent of synch-rep.
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Gianni Ciolli||Date: 2009-01-11 10:44:42|
|Subject: Re: Time to finalize patches for 8.4 beta|
|Previous:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2009-01-11 09:41:59|
|Subject: Re: foreign_data test fails with non-C locale|