On Friday, April 27, 2012 08:38:10 PM Simon Riggs wrote: > On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 7:29 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > >> On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Alvaro Herrera > >> > >> <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> wrote: > >>> It occurs to me that we may need a new mode, which disconnects sessions > >>> that are not in a transaction (or as soon as they are) but leaves > >>> in-progress transactions alone; this could be the new default. Of > >>> course, this is much more difficult to implement than the current > >>> modes. > >> > >> This idea appeared to have some support. I'd like to suggest that we > >> take this a step further. Instead of adding a fourth mode, I'd like > >> to suggest that we redefine "smart" to have the behavior described > >> above. > > > > No, I'm not happy with that. Smart shutdown is defined to not affect > > current sessions. I'm fine with having a fourth mode that acts as you > > suggest (and, probably, even with making it the default); but not with > > taking away a behavior that people may well be relying on. > > Agreed, but not sure what to call the new mode: "smarter"? graceful?
Andres -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
