Re: dropdb --force
От | Marti Raudsepp |
---|---|
Тема | Re: dropdb --force |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CABRT9RD=QQExSQztrz5-ZSCxG96RjffL8_1v+K2ouqe=ahao+A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: dropdb --force (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: dropdb --force
Re: dropdb --force Re: dropdb --force |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi > út 18. 12. 2018 v 16:11 odesílatel Filip Rembiałkowski <filip.rembialkowski@gmail.com> napsal: >> Please share opinions if this makes sense at all, and has any chance >> going upstream. Clearly since Pavel has another implementation of the same concept, there is some interest in this feature. :) On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 5:20 PM Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote: > Still one my customer use a patch that implement FORCE on SQL level. It is necessary under higher load when is not easyto synchronize clients. I think Filip's approach of setting pg_database.datallowconn='false' is pretty clever to avoid the synchronization problem. But it's also a good idea to expose this functionality via DROP DATABASE in SQL, like Pavel's patch, not just the 'dropdb' binary. If this is to be accepted into PostgreSQL core, I think the two approaches should be combined on the server side. Regards, Marti Raudsepp
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: