Re: Clean shutdown and warm standby
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Clean shutdown and warm standby |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4A1EA775.3090705@enterprisedb.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Clean shutdown and warm standby (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Clean shutdown and warm standby
Re: Clean shutdown and warm standby |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs wrote: > On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 17:21 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> Simon Riggs wrote: >>> I don't think it does, please look again. >> Still looks ok to me. pgarch_ArchiverCopyLoop() loops until all ready >> WAL segments have been archived (assuming no errors). > > No, it doesn't now, though it did used to. line 440. postmaster never sends SIGTERM to pgarch, and postmaster is still alive. >>>> Ok, we're good then I guess. >>> No, because as I said, if archive_command has been returning non-zero >>> then the archive will be incomplete. >> Yes. You think that's wrong? How would you like it to behave, then? I >> don't think you want the shutdown to wait indefinitely until all files >> have been archived if there's an error. > > The complaint was that we needed to run a manual step to synchronise the > pg_xlog directory on the standby. We still need to do that, even after > the patch has been committed because 2 cases are not covered, so what is > the point of the recent change? It isn't enough. It *might* be enough, > most of the time, but you have no way of knowing that is the case and it > is dangerous not to check. So you check. This solves Guillaume's immediate concern. If you have a suggestion for further improvements, I'm all ears. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: