Re: Should commit_delay be PGC_SIGHUP?
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Should commit_delay be PGC_SIGHUP? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoY4r2=KM4jg6Cj3_jyJQwMZUYRb9H_Ymgi=6PBh4T==qA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Should commit_delay be PGC_SIGHUP? (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Should commit_delay be PGC_SIGHUP?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 8:06 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> Hmm. If a malicious user could hurt performance for other sessions with >> a bad setting of commit_delay, then USERSET is clearly a bad idea. >> But it still seems like it could be SUSET rather than SIGHUP. > > Agreed; everybody gets what they want. Committed. This is fine with me, too, and I agree that it's warranted... but your commit message supposes that this behavior is new in 9.3, and I think it dates to 9.2. I'm not inclined to think the issue is serious enough to back-patch (and risk breaking current installations) but I thought that it worth mentioning.... -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: