| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
| Cc: | 'Masahiko Sawada' <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Changing the setting of wal_sender_timeout per standby |
| Date: | 2018-09-20 23:51:55 |
| Message-ID: | 20180920235155.GC1338@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 06:21:52AM +0000, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
> How embarrassing... I'm sorry to cause you trouble to point out a
> silly mistake like this (I thought I would write as you suggested, but
> it seems that I was not who I usually am.) The revised patch
> attached.
Thanks for the new version. Per my comments up-thread here, you cannot
actually use PGC_BACKEND:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20180919061303.GB19808@paquier.xyz
This would break the case where this parameter is reloaded when a
session does not use a custom value for wal_sender_timeout. I have also
looked at all the code paths using wal_sender_timeout, and the change
looks safe to me. Please find attached an update, simplified, version.
Does that look fine to you?
--
Michael
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| wal-timeout-userset-michael.patch | text/x-diff | 1.2 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-09-20 23:59:32 | Re: pgsql: Make WAL segment size configurable at initdb time. |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2018-09-20 23:40:40 | transction_timestamp() inside of procedures |