Re: Reducing power consumption on idle servers

On Sun, 13 Nov 2022 at 23:07, Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 13 Nov 2022 at 21:28, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 5:52 AM Simon Riggs
> > <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> > > The attached patch is a reduced version of the original. It covers only:
> > > * deprecation of the promote_trigger_file - there are no tests that
> > > use that, hence why there is no test coverage for the patch
> > > * changing the sleep time of the startup process to 60s
> > > * docs and comments
> >
> > LPGTM. If we also fix the bogus SIGALRM wakeups[1], then finally a
> > completely idle recovery process looks like:
> >
> > kevent(8,0x0,0,{ },1,{ 60.000000000 }) = 0 (0x0)
> > kevent(8,0x0,0,{ },1,{ 60.000000000 }) = 0 (0x0)
> > kevent(8,0x0,0,{ },1,{ 60.000000000 }) = 0 (0x0)
> >
> > Presumably it would have no timeout at all in the next release.
> >
> > [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALj2ACUiYn+ZmPGUVmGeoY1u7ino2qsvqrnufk8sWPvK3A8yJA@mail.gmail.com
>
> Clearly, I haven't been watching Hackers! Thanks for the nudge.
>
> See if this does the trick?

Looks like the SIGALRM wakeups will be silenced on the other thread,
so we can just revert back to using v6 of this patch.

Reposting v6 now so that patch tester doesn't think this has failed
when the patch on other thread gets applied.

--
Simon Riggs http://www.EnterpriseDB.com/