| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Timeout failure in 019_replslot_limit.pl |
| Date: | 2021-09-18 20:19:04 |
| Message-ID: | 202109182019.vn2sycg4ungr@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2021-Sep-18, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Could it be possible to rely on a combination of wait events set in WAL
> senders and pg_stat_replication to assume that a WAL sender is in a
> stopped state?
Hmm, sounds a possibly useful idea to explore, but I would only do so if
the other ideas prove fruitless, because it sounds like it'd have more
moving parts. Can you please first test if the idea of sending the signal
twice is enough? If that doesn't work, let's try Horiguchi-san's idea
of using some `ps` flags to find the process.
--
Álvaro Herrera 39°49'30"S 73°17'W — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
Al principio era UNIX, y UNIX habló y dijo: "Hello world\n".
No dijo "Hello New Jersey\n", ni "Hello USA\n".
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2021-09-18 20:35:22 | Re: postgres.h included from relcache.h - but removing it breaks pg_upgrade |
| Previous Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2021-09-18 18:58:36 | Re: postgres.h included from relcache.h - but removing it breaks pg_upgrade |