Re: [PATCH] pg_isready (was: [WIP] pg_ping utility)

From: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Phil Sorber <phil(at)omniti(dot)com>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pg_isready (was: [WIP] pg_ping utility)
Date: 2013-01-26 21:37:04
Message-ID: CAFj8pRBy_-ZnSYBbNJECqBeMHZ36DA1Qg3FdjqJw-zA4ZFp0Cg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

2013/1/26 Phil Sorber <phil(at)omniti(dot)com>:
> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 12:39 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> 2013/1/26 Phil Sorber <phil(at)omniti(dot)com>:
>>> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>>> 2013/1/26 Phil Sorber <phil(at)omniti(dot)com>:
>>>>> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 4:02 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>>>>> Hello
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We now haw to solve small puppet issue, because our puppets try to
>>>>>> start server too early, when old instance live still.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe some new parameter - is_done can be useful.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What about something like:
>>>>> pg_isready; while [ $? -ne 2 ]; do sleep 1; pg_isready; done
>>>>
>>>> it is not enough - server is done in a moment, where can be started
>>>> again - or when we can do safe copy of database data directory.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I guess i am not completely understanding the case you are trying to
>>> solve. Can you explain a bit further?
>>
>> We use puppets and due some simplification we cannot to use reload
>> when configuration is changed. Our puppets has not enough intelligence
>> to understand when is reload enough and when is restart necessary. So
>> any change to configuration require restarting postgres. I don't know
>> why "service restart" are not used. I believe so our puppet guru know
>> it. It just do sequence STOP:START Now puppets are "smart" and able
>> to wait for time, when server is ready. But there are missing simple
>> test if server is really done and I see a error messages related to
>> too early try to start. So some important feature can be verification
>> so server is really done.
>>
>> We can do it with test on pid file now - and probably we will use it.
>> But I see so this is similar use case (in opposite direction)
>>
>
> I guess I am still not clear why you can't do:
>
> stop_pg_via_puppet
> pg_isready
> while [ $? -ne 2 ]
> do
> sleep 1
> pg_isready
> done
> do_post_stop_things
> start_pg_via_puppet
>

because ! pg_isready <> pg_isdone

>> Regards
>>
>> Pavel
>>
>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> Pavel
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps with a counter to break out of the loop after some number of attempts.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Pavel
>>>>>>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Aaron W. Swenson 2013-01-26 21:44:24 Re: "pg_ctl promote" exit status
Previous Message Steve Singer 2013-01-26 21:20:33 Re: logical changeset generation v4 - Heikki's thoughts about the patch state