On 10 February 2016 at 22:39, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> So I propose the attached patch. Any objections? Should this get > >> back-patched? It's arguably a bug, though surely a minor one, that > >> the message comes out when it does. > > > I would vote against a back-patch. And I kind of agree with Jim's > > comments that we ought to consider sprinkling a few more debug > > messages into the shutdown sequence. > > [ shrug... ] I won't stand in the way of someone else figuring out > what makes sense there, but I don't intend to do it; and I don't think > that the quick hacks I did over the last couple days make a reasonable > basis for a permanent patch. >
I think its worth adding log messages, but only when its slower than expected. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ <http://www.2ndquadrant.com/> PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
