| From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Zheng Li <zhengli10(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <nasbyj(at)amazon(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Reducing power consumption on idle servers |
| Date: | 2022-11-18 20:25:36 |
| Message-ID: | CA+hUKGKc5yh=53FhMoQ0MXVOR3FoALFi7y5n5OSyaDposD_MLg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Nov 19, 2022 at 7:54 AM Simon Riggs
<simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> I agree. I can't see a reason to keep it anymore.
+ Use of <varname>promote_trigger_file</varname> is deprecated. If you're
I think 'deprecated' usually implies that it still works but you
should avoid it. I think you need something stronger.
> I'm nervous about not having any wakeup at all, but since we are
> removing the parameter there is no other reason not to do as Andres
> suggests.
Why? If we're accidentally relying on this timeout for recovery to
not hang in some situation, that's a bug waiting to be discovered and
fixed and it won't be this patch's fault.
> New version attached, which assumes that the SIGALRMs are silenced on
> the other thread.
I tested this + Bharath's v5 from the other thread. meson test
passes, and tracing the recovery process shows that it is indeed,
finally, completely idle. Huzzah!
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2022-11-18 20:55:34 | test/modules/test_oat_hooks vs. debug_discard_caches=1 |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2022-11-18 19:38:25 | Re: New docs chapter on Transaction Management and related changes |