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

Re: Online base backup from the hot-standby

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Steve Singer <ssinger_pg(at)sympatico(dot)ca>, Jun Ishiduka <ishizuka(dot)jun(at)po(dot)ntts(dot)co(dot)jp>, magnus(at)hagander(dot)net, heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, cedric(dot)villemain(dot)debian(at)gmail(dot)com
Subject: Re: Online base backup from the hot-standby
Date: 2012-01-25 08:49:42
Message-ID: CA+U5nMKEh4ZmNf+juynz22XjDDi_C33Es+H4iMRV=bpjQT_VBw@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 8:16 AM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

>> What happens if we shutdown the WALwriter and then issue SIGHUP?
>
> SIGHUP doesn't affect full_page_writes in that case. Oh, you are concerned about
> the case where smart shutdown kills walwriter but some backends are
> still running?
> Currently SIGHUP affects full_page_writes and running backends use the changed
> new value of full_page_writes. But in the patch, SIGHUP doesn't affect...
>
> To address the problem, we should either postpone the shutdown of walwriter
> until all backends have gone away, or leave the update of full_page_writes to
> checkpointer process instead of walwriter. Thought?

checkpointer seems the correct place to me

-- 
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Oleg BartunovDate: 2012-01-25 10:01:47
Subject: Re: PgNext: CFP
Previous:From: Fujii MasaoDate: 2012-01-25 08:16:40
Subject: Re: Online base backup from the hot-standby

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