From: | Glyn Astill <glynastill(at)yahoo(dot)co(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Startup scripts - Use -m fast or smart? |
Date: | 2008-01-09 13:28:00 |
Message-ID: | 435112.97123.qm@web25809.mail.ukl.yahoo.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Thanks Laurenz, that's a good point, I shall leave them as is.
Glyn
--- Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at> wrote:
> Glyn Astill wrote:
> > I've just changed my startup scripts to use the linux one
> supplied in
> > contrib.
> >
> > I noticed this uses the "-m fast" argument for start and stop.
> >
> > Before I setup the scripts I was using "-m smart" to make sure
> all
> > queries were finished before shutting dowm on all but my WAL
> slave.
> >
> > I was going to change these to -m smart just to be safe, however
> I
> > just wanted to check if there was any reason not to do this?
>
> If you have "pg_ctl stop -m smart" in your shutdown script, this
> will prevent your host from shutting down as long as somebody is
> still
> connected to the database, even if the connections are idle.
>
> This is most likely *not* what you want.
>
> -m fast is the correct thing for server shutdown. It will do no
> damage
> as all active transactions will be rolled back.
>
> If there are database transactions that you do not want to
> interrupt,
> the best approach is not to shutdown the database server.
>
> Yours,
> Laurenz Albe
>
__________________________________________________________
Sent from Yahoo! Mail - a smarter inbox http://uk.mail.yahoo.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ashish Karalkar | 2008-01-09 13:29:48 | Re: Insert waiting for update? |
Previous Message | Albe Laurenz | 2008-01-09 12:53:06 | Re: Startup scripts - Use -m fast or smart? |