Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Review: Hot standby

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Review: Hot standby
Date: 2008-11-28 17:45:37
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On Fri, 2008-11-28 at 11:44 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I hadn't been following the discussion closely enough to know what the
>> problem is. 

> When we replay an AccessExclusiveLock on the standby we need to kick off
> any current lock holders, after a configurable grace period. Current
> lock holders may include some read-only backends that are
> idle-in-transaction. SIGINT, which is what the current patch uses, is
> not sufficient to dislodge the idle backends.

Hm.  People have complained of that fact from time to time in normal
usage as well.  Should we simply change SIGINT handling to allow it to
cancel an idle transaction?

			regards, tom lane

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Greg StarkDate: 2008-11-28 18:00:19
Subject: "could not devise a query plan for the given query"
Previous:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2008-11-28 17:31:35
Subject: Re: Review: Hot standby

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group