On 4/20/17 07:52, Petr Jelinek wrote: > On 20/04/17 05:57, Michael Paquier wrote: >> 2nd thoughts here... Ah now I see your point. True that there is no >> way to ensure that an unwanted command is not running when SIGUSR2 is >> received as the shutdown checkpoint may have already begun. Here is an >> idea: add a new state in WalSndState, say WALSNDSTATE_STOPPING, and >> the shutdown checkpoint does not run as long as all WAL senders still >> running do not reach such a state. > > +1 to this solution
Michael, can you attempt to supply a patch? -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
