| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Sergei Kornilov <sk(at)zsrv(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, "andres(at)anarazel(dot)de" <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "david(at)pgmasters(dot)net" <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: allow online change primary_conninfo |
| Date: | 2020-01-22 05:14:31 |
| Message-ID: | 20200122051431.GF174860@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 06:03:18PM +0300, Sergei Kornilov wrote:
> PS: also, I surprised why it's ok for wal_receiver_create_temp_slot
> to be PGC_SIGHUP and ignore change of this setting until walreceiver
> will reconnect by unrelated reason. I means walreceiver does nothing
> special on SIGHUP. In common case change of
> wal_receiver_create_temp_slot setting will have effect only during
> restart of walreceiver process. And therefore we will switch to
> archive recovery. But such design was strongly rejected for my patch
> year ago.
[ Looks at 3297308... ]
Yeah, you are right. I was not paying much attention but something
does not stick here. My understanding is that we should have the WAL
receiver receive the value it needs to use from the startup process
(aka via RequestXLogStreaming from xlog.c), and that we ought to make
this new parameter PGC_POSTMASTER instead of PGC_SIGHUP. HEAD is
inconsistent here.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | 曾文旌 (义从) | 2020-01-22 05:29:50 | Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables |
| Previous Message | Dilip Kumar | 2020-01-22 05:10:40 | Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions |