On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 10:13 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> There's a complaint over here
> about the archiver process not being very swift to adopt a new
> value of archive_command. This is because it only reacts to SIGHUP
> once per outer loop, ie, only after completing an archiving cycle.
> This is unhelpful in the example case, since the point of changing
> the command is to get it to finish archiving faster.
> How do people feel about adding
> /* Check for config update */
> if (got_SIGHUP)
> got_SIGHUP = false;
> to the inner loop in pgarch_ArchiverCopyLoop? This would allow
> a new archive_command value to be adopted immediately for the next
> copy attempt. (Hm, I guess we'd need to recheck XLogArchiveCommandSet
> as well...)
Yeah, go for it.
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Takahiro Itagaki||Date: 2010-05-11 04:59:00|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] "SET search_path" clause ignored during function creation |
|Previous:||From: Fujii Masao||Date: 2010-05-11 04:21:16|
|Subject: Re: Archiver not picking up changes to archive_command|