Zdenek Kotala wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Zdenek Kotala wrote:
> >> I add few sentences how to write cache works on Solaris platform.
> >
> > I have updated our documentation with the attached patch. I was able to
> > verify all the information in this change.
>
> Thanks.
>
> > I change
I wrote:
> One point needing discussion is that the postmaster is currently
> coded not to send SIGUSR1 to the archiver if a fast-mode shutdown
> is under way. I duplicated that in the added SIGUSR1 signal here,
> but I wonder whether it is sane or not. Comments?
After chewing on that for awhile
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hmm, so the postmaster is gone during the last archiving cycle? What
> about syslogger? Is the archiver able to log stuff in the last cycle?
The logger is no problem --- it quits when it sees EOF on its input
pipe, which means that all upstream proces
Tom Lane wrote:
> The attached patch fixes archiver shutdown in what seems to me to be
> a sane way. With the patch, we send SIGQUIT to the archiver only for
> panic-stop situations (backend crash or immediate-mode shutdown).
> This is important because the postmaster is coded to send SIGQUIT
> to
The attached patch fixes archiver shutdown in what seems to me to be
a sane way. With the patch, we send SIGQUIT to the archiver only for
panic-stop situations (backend crash or immediate-mode shutdown).
This is important because the postmaster is coded to send SIGQUIT
to the entire process group,
"Alvaro Herrera" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> Comparing the behavior of this to my patch for HEAD, I am coming to the
>> conclusion that this is actually a *better* planning method than
>> removing the redundant join conditions, even when they're truly
>> rendundant! The rea
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 10:15 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Not sure why this hasn't being applied yet for 8.3
>
> Because it doesn't fix the problem ... which is that the postmaster
> kills the archiver (and the stats collector too) at what is now the
> wrong
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Not sure why this hasn't being applied yet for 8.3
Because it doesn't fix the problem ... which is that the postmaster
kills the archiver (and the stats collector too) at what is now the
wrong point in the shutdown sequence.
regar
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Zdenek Kotala wrote:
I add few sentences how to write cache works on Solaris platform.
I have updated our documentation with the attached patch. I was able to
verify all the information in this change.
Thanks.
I changed your original wording because the statement th
On Sat, 2008-01-05 at 12:09 +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 17:28 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> > Simon Riggs wrote:
> >
> > > My original one line change described on bug 3843 seems like the best
> > > solution for 8.3.
> > >
> >
> > +1
> > Is this change in time for RC1?
>
> P
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 02:40:42PM +0900, Hiroshi Saito wrote:
> Hi Magnus.
>
> From: "Magnus Hagander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> >I see the problem now. In my dev kit, there is no error for using
> >_USE_32BIT_TIME_T on Win64. That's why I got caught up in your patch being
> >wrong.
>
> Umm,..
On 08/01/2008, Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 10:02:24AM +0900, Hiroshi Saito wrote:
> A question there though - do we care about the length of time_t on client
> platforms, or should we instead just disable the whole check for the
> client? AFAICS we don't ex
On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 23:08 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Hmm, I think that must be my fault, but I'm not sure how it got by me
> ... I'm usually pretty careful about adding outfuncs support when I add
> a node field. Patch looks good, please apply.
Applied to HEAD.
-Neil
-
13 matches
Mail list logo
