On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 7:03 AM, Tatsuo Ishii <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Can you please point to the CVS versions that I can look at to see if > these > > can be back patched. > > Here. > > http://lists.pgfoundry.org/pipermail/pgpool-committers/2011-May/001749.html > > Thanks Tatsuo. The patch is not terribly large, but it _does_ introduce a change to a structure. Would it be possible to backpatch this to version 3.0.x. That patch allows the pgpool to stay online while a new backend is being added to the pool. It still doesn't seem to fix the issue where pgpool disconnects all clients when we want to safely remove a slave backend from the pool; or did I overlook something. IMHO, it should be possible to remove a slave backend and disconnect _only_ those clients which have active queries on the slave going down, while other slaves are still connected and running their queries. I understand that in Master/Slave configuration every incoming connection has outgoing connection to a master and a slave, but it'd be great to allow clients to stay on while an unrelated slave is being brought down manually. Thanks, -- Gurjeet Singh EnterpriseDB Corporation The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
_______________________________________________ Pgpool-hackers mailing list [email protected] http://pgfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/pgpool-hackers
