Hi,
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 4:21 AM, Simon Riggs<simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2009-06-09 at 20:59 +0200, Kolb, Harald (NSN - DE/Munich) wrote:
>
>> There are some good reasons why a switchover could be an appropriate
>> means in case the DB is facing troubles. It may be that the root cause
>> is not the DB itsself, but used resources or other things which are
>> going crazy and hit the DB first ( we've seen a lot of these
>> unbelievable things which made us quite sensible for robustness
>> aspects). Therefore we want to have control on the DB recovery.
>> If you don't want to see this option as a GUC parameter, would it be
>> acceptable to have it as a new postmaster cmd line option ?
>
> Even if you had this, you still need to STONITH just in case the
> failover happens by mistake.
Yes. On second thought, probably we should solve this kind of problem
outside of Postgres.
> Is there a possibility to deactivate the restart and to force the postmaster
> to simply exit at the end ?
> The background is that we will have a watchdog process which will in
> this case perform a fast switchover to the standby side (in case of
> syncronous replication) or will restart the db by its own and in addition
> will perform some specific actions.
To return to the original Harald's problem, the watchdog process can
shoot postmaster before doing the next action.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center