Re: wal_sender_delay is still required?

Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of lun dic 06 23:49:52 -0300 2010:
> Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > One problem with the patch is that it takes longer (at most 10s) to
> > detect the unexpected death of postmaster (by calling PostmasterIsAlive()).
> > This is OK for me. But does anyone want to specify the delay to detect
> > that within a short time?
>
> Oh. Hm. I'm hesitant to remove the setting if there's still some
> behavior that it would control. Maybe we should just crank up the
> default value instead.

Maybe we should have a single tunable for processes that just sleep
waiting for events or postmaster death. For example pgstats has a
hardcoded 2 seconds, and the archiver process has a hardcoded value too
AFAICS.

--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support