Re: Should we eliminate or reduce HUP from docs?

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
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 20:02:30
Message-ID: 20170310200230.cpk6zp2edythpak2@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

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).

Hah.

> 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.

There are several ways to cause a config file reload (pg_ctl reload,
pg_reload_conf, direct SIGHUP). We could have a section in docs listing
them all, and then all the other places that say a reload needs to occur
simply refer the reader to that section.

--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2017-03-10 20:05:04 Re: Need a builtin way to run all tests faster manner
Previous Message Andres Freund 2017-03-10 20:01:53 Re: Should we eliminate or reduce HUP from docs?