Re: bgwriter never dies
| От | Neil Conway |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: bgwriter never dies |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 87k72bahoh.fsf@mailbox.samurai.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: bgwriter never dies (Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: bgwriter never dies
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com> writes: > In the case of a postmaster crash, I think something in the system > is so wrong that I'd prefer an immediate shutdown. I agree. Allowing existing backends to commit transactions after the postmaster has died doesn't strike me as being that useful, and is probably more confusing than anything else. That said, if it takes some period of time between the death of the postmaster and the shutdown of any backends, we *need* to ensure that any transactions committed during that period still make it to durable storage. -Neil
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: