On 2011-03-09 08:38, Fujii Masao wrote:
On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 2:14 PM, Jaime Casanova<ja...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Robert Haas<robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
The fast shutdown handling seems fine, but why not just handle smart
shutdown the same way?
currently, smart shutdown means no new connections, wait until
existing ones close normally. for consistency, it should behave the
same for sync rep.
Agreed. I think that user who wants to request smart shutdown expects all
the existing connections to basically be closed normally by the client. So it
doesn't seem to be good idea to forcibly close the connection and prevent
the COMMIT from being returned in smart shutdown case. But I'm all ears
for better suggestions.
For me smart has always been synonymous to no forced disconnects/exits,
or put different, the 'clean' solution, as opposite to the fast and
unclean shutdown.
An alternative for a clean solution might be to forbid smart shutdown,
if none of the sync standbys is connected. This would prevent the master
to enter a state in which a standby cannot connect anymore.
regards,
Yeb Havinga
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
