Tom,
Thanks for this. I am going to push for reproducing the problem in a
test environment. If I have any success, I will follow up with results
and more details.
__
Marc
On Sat, 2005-09-17 at 01:23 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Fuhr <mike@fuhr.org> writes:
> > On Fri, Sep 16, 2005 at 04:34:46PM -0700, Marc Munro wrote:
> >> On Fri, 2005-09-16 at 17:10 -0600, Michael Fuhr wrote:
> >> This is not currently seen as a priority (the work-around of "don't do
> >> that" is seen as sufficient). I'm simply hoping to get someone to say
> >> for sure that the client app should not be able to tell that a reload
> >> has happened. At that point I may be able to raise the priority of this
> >> issue.
>
> > As far as I know clients shouldn't notice a reload (which is effected
> > via a SIGHUP); I just did some tests and didn't see any problems.
>
> Existing client connections should not be able to notice a reload that
> changes pg_hba.conf or pg_ident.conf; however they definitely *should*
> notice a reload that changes postgresql.conf (at least for parameters
> that aren't overridden by other cases, such as a SET in the current
> session). So the blanket statement Marc is making is simply wrong.
>
> Whether there is a bug here is impossible to say given the limited
> amount of information provided. I'd not expect a reload to cause
> an existing connection to become totally dysfunctional, which is
> what Marc seems to be claiming ... but without more evidence or
> a test case, there's not much to be done.
>
> regards, tom lane