On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> HOWEVER, I do believe this is an issue we could live with for 9.0 if
>> it's going to lead to a whole lot of additional debugging of SR. But if
>> it's an easy fix, it'll avoid a lot of complaints on pgsql-general.
> I think that the latter statement is right.
Though we've not reached consensus on smart shutdown during
recovery yet, I wrote the patch that changes its behavior:
shut down the server (including the startup process and the
walreceiver) as soon as all read-only connections have died.
The code is also available in the 'replication' branch in
my git repository.
And, let's discuss whether something like the attached patch
is required for v9.0 or not.
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: KaiGai Kohei||Date: 2010-02-01 03:04:53|
|Subject: Re: [BUG?] strange behavior in ALTER TABLE ... RENAME TO
on inherited columns|
|Previous:||From: Alvaro Herrera||Date: 2010-02-01 02:27:24|
|Subject: Re: mailing list archiver chewing patches|