On 27.04.2012 21:56, Tom Lane wrote:
Magnus Hagander<mag...@hagander.net>  writes:
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 20:48, Tom Lane<t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>  wrote:
I'm not necessarily opposed to commandeering the name "smart" for the
new behavior, so that what we have to find a name for is the old "smart"
behavior.  How about

        slow    - allow existing sessions to finish (old "smart")

How about "wait" instead of "slow"?

I kinda liked "slow" vs "fast", but if you think that's too cute ...
("wait" doesn't seem very good, though, since all these except immediate
are waiting, just for different things.)

All the modes indeed wait (except for immediate), so I think it would make sense to define the modes in terms of *what* they wait for.

        wait sessions   - allow existing sessions to finish (old "smart")
        wait transactions       - allow existing transactions to finish (new)
        wait checkpoint - kill active queries
        wait none - unclean shutdown

Hmm, the latter two are perhaps a bit confusing. So maybe:

        wait_sessions   - allow existing sessions to finish (old "smart")
        wait_transactions       - allow existing transactions to finish (new)
        fast    - kill active queries
        immediate - unclean shutdown

Just thinking out loud here..

--
  Heikki Linnakangas
  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Reply via email to