On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 5:38 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Another and probably bigger thing is that SIGHUP is used for settings
> that do something useful only in background processes (eg checkpointer).
> Some of those processes are not capable of reading system catalogs at
> all. This is particularly a showstopper for settings affecting the
> postmaster itself, which is most certainly *not* going to grow the
> ability to read catalogs.
This seems like a pretty large strike against this whole idea. In
fact, I think we might want to abandon this whole approach on this
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2012-11-16 17:08:26|
|Subject: Re: Materialized views WIP patch|
|Previous:||From: Atri Sharma||Date: 2012-11-16 17:04:43|
|Subject: Re: [v9.3] writable foreign tables|