On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 7:01 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
>>> It's a good question if that still makes sense with Hot Standby.
>>> Perhaps we should redefine smart shutdown in standby mode to shut down
>>> as soon as all read-only connections have died.
>> It's clear that "smart" shutdown doesn't work while something is active.
>> Recovery is "active" and so we shouldn't shutdown. It makes sense, it
>> works like this already, lets leave it. Document it if needed.
> I don't think it's clear, or intuitive for users. In SR, recovery is
> *never* done, so smart shutdown never completes (even if the master is
> shut down, when I tested it). This is particularly an important issue
> when you consider that some/many service and init scripts only use smart
> shutdown ... so we'll get a lot of "bug reports" of "posgresql does not
> shut down".
Absolutely agreed. The existing smart shutdown behavior makes sense
from a certain point of view, but it doesn't seem very... what's the
word I'm looking for?... smart.
> 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.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Andres Freund||Date: 2010-01-30 00:31:18|
|Subject: Re: PG 9.0 and standard_conforming_strings|
|Previous:||From: Josh Berkus||Date: 2010-01-30 00:01:15|
|Subject: Re: HS/SR and smart shutdown|