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

Re: Make archiver check for SIGHUP more often?

From: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Make archiver check for SIGHUP more often?
Date: 2010-05-11 04:37:53
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 10:13 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> There's a complaint over here
> about the archiver process not being very swift to adopt a new
> value of archive_command.  This is because it only reacts to SIGHUP
> once per outer loop, ie, only after completing an archiving cycle.
> This is unhelpful in the example case, since the point of changing
> the command is to get it to finish archiving faster.
> How do people feel about adding
>                /* Check for config update */
>                if (got_SIGHUP)
>                {
>                        got_SIGHUP = false;
>                        ProcessConfigFile(PGC_SIGHUP);
>                }
> to the inner loop in pgarch_ArchiverCopyLoop?  This would allow
> a new archive_command value to be adopted immediately for the next
> copy attempt.  (Hm, I guess we'd need to recheck XLogArchiveCommandSet
> as well...)

Yeah, go for it.


Fujii Masao
NTT Open Source Software Center

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Takahiro ItagakiDate: 2010-05-11 04:59:00
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] "SET search_path" clause ignored during function creation
Previous:From: Fujii MasaoDate: 2010-05-11 04:21:16
Subject: Re: Archiver not picking up changes to archive_command

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group