On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 20:48, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 7:29 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> 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"? > > I'm not necessarily opposed to commandeering the name "smart" for the > new behavior, so that what we have to find a name for is the old "smart" > behavior. How about > > slow - allow existing sessions to finish (old "smart")
How about "wait" instead of "slow"? > smart - allow existing transactions to finish (new) and still default, right? > fast - kill active queries > immediate - unclean shutdown -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
