Hi, On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 7:29 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 2:14 AM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: >> Greg Stark wrote: >>> >>> On 7 Jan 2009, at 09:47, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: >>> >>> > Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >>> >> It's required by the sync replication patch, but has no value >>> >> otherwise. >>> > >>> > Well, we have talked about allowing more signalling long-term, and >>> > this >>> > would accomplish that independent of the sync replication, so we might >>> > want to revisit this someday if it isn't included in sync replication. >>> >>> I also needed this for the progress indicator patch. I used SIGQUIT >>> for the proof-of-concept patch but I wouldn't want to lose that signal >>> for real. >> >> Yep, we want multiplexed signals independent of sync replication. > > The updated patch of multiplexing SIGUSR1 is included in v5 of > synch-rep patch. (01_signal_handling.patch) > http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/NTT%27s_Development_Projects#Version_History > > This patch can be also reviewed independent of synch-rep.
Is this patch going to be reviewed and committed for 8.4? Though I think that this is useful also to the patch of those other than replication. Regards, -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
