Re: Should we eliminate or reduce HUP from docs?

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Should we eliminate or reduce HUP from docs?
Date: 2017-03-10 20:01:53
Message-ID: 20170310200153.pjppmoehnqh3pl6v@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2017-03-10 11:57:30 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> I am a bad speaker, I am writing a talk three weeks before the conference
> (as opposed to on the plane). I noticed in the docs we still reference the
> passing of SIGHUP for reloading conf file but we now have pg_reload_conf();
>
> It seems the use of pg_reload_conf() would provide a better canonical
> interface to our users. Especially those users who are not used to
> interacting with the OS (Windows, Oracle etc...) for databases.

-1 HUP is useful for external control. Doesn't require to have a valid
log-in into the database.

Regards,

Andres

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2017-03-10 20:02:30 Re: Should we eliminate or reduce HUP from docs?
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2017-03-10 19:57:30 Should we eliminate or reduce HUP from docs?