| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Rob Wultsch <wultsch(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful |
| Date: | 2010-05-06 08:12:51 |
| Message-ID: | 1273133571.12659.41.camel@ebony |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2010-05-05 at 23:15 -0700, Rob Wultsch wrote:
> I manage a bunch of different environments and I am pretty sure that
> in any of them if the db started seemingly randomly killing queries I
> would have application teams followed quickly by executives coming
> after me with torches and pitchforks.
Fully understood and well argued, thanks for your input.
HS doesn't randomly kill queries and there are documented work-arounds
to control this behaviour.
Removing the parameter won't help the situation at all, it will make the
situation *worse* by removing control from where it's clearly needed and
removing all hope of making the HS feature work in practice. There is no
consensus to remove the parameter.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Boszormenyi Zoltan | 2010-05-06 08:52:42 | Partitioning/inherited tables vs FKs |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-05-06 08:03:53 | Re: LogStandbySnapshot (was another thread) |