On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 8:49 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> 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
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2012-01-25 18:07:31|
|Subject: Re: [v9.2] LEAKPROOF attribute of FUNCTION (Re: [v9.2] Fix
Leaky View Problem)|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2012-01-25 17:58:15|
|Subject: Re: GUC_REPORT for protocol tunables was: Re: Optimize binary serialization format of arrays with fixed size elements |