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
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? |