On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 4:48 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> I think saner behavior might only require this change:
>
> /*
> * Any unexpected exit (including FATAL exit) of the startup
> * process is treated as a crash, except that we don't want to
> * reinitialize.
> */
> if (!EXIT_STATUS_0(exitstatus))
> {
> - RecoveryError = true;
> + if (!FatalError)
> + RecoveryError = true;
> HandleChildCrash(pid, exitstatus,
> _("startup process"));
> continue;
> }
>
> plus suitable comment adjustments of course. Haven't tested this yet
> though.
Looks good, will test.
> It's a bit disturbing that nobody has reported this from the field yet.
> Seems to imply that hot standby isn't being used much.
There are many people I know using it in production for more than a year now.
Either they haven't seen it or they haven't reported it to us.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
