Re: [PATCH] better systemd integration

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] better systemd integration
Date: 2016-01-30 21:38:09
Message-ID: 56AD2D41.7050102@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 1/29/16 4:15 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> Hi
>
> >
> >
> > You sent only rebased code of previous version. I didn't find additional
> > checks.
>
> Oops. Here is the actual new code.
>
>
> New test is working as expected
>
> I did lot of tests - and this code works perfect in single server mode,
> and with slave hot-standby mode.
>
> It doesn't work with only standby mode

Yeah, I hadn't though of that. How about this change in addition:

diff --git a/src/backend/postmaster/postmaster.c b/src/backend/postmaster/postmaster.c
index 2e7f1d7..d983a50 100644
--- a/src/backend/postmaster/postmaster.c
+++ b/src/backend/postmaster/postmaster.c
@@ -4933,6 +4933,11 @@ sigusr1_handler(SIGNAL_ARGS)
if (XLogArchivingAlways())
PgArchPID = pgarch_start();

+#ifdef USE_SYSTEMD
+ if (!EnableHotStandby)
+ sd_notify(0, "READY=1");
+#endif
+
pmState = PM_RECOVERY;
}
if (CheckPostmasterSignal(PMSIGNAL_BEGIN_HOT_STANDBY) &&

> Default timeout on FC is 90 sec - it is should not to be enough for
> large servers with large shared buffers and high checkpoint segments. It
> should be mentioned in service file.

Good point. I think we should set TimeoutSec=0 in the suggested service file.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2016-01-30 21:51:03 Re: [PATCH] better systemd integration
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2016-01-30 21:36:10 Re: [PATCH] better systemd integration