Re: dropdb --force
От | Filip Rembiałkowski |
---|---|
Тема | Re: dropdb --force |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAP_rwwn=v3dE05H3E06UFKR3JqLRnF_XLqbHgz7oH73Z3GxkKA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: dropdb --force (Marti Raudsepp <marti@juffo.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: dropdb --force
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Here is Pavel's patch rebased to master branch, added the dropdb --force option, a test case & documentation. I'm willing to work on it if needed. What are possible bad things that could happen here? Is the documentation clear enough? Thanks. On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 4:34 PM Marti Raudsepp <marti@juffo.org> wrote: > > 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
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: