> -Original Message-
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 24 January 2005 23:58
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: pgsql-patches@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCHES] pg_autovacuum Win32 Service startup delay
>
> "Dave Page" writes:
> > Wh
"Matthew T. O'Connor" writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I was a bit worried about the scenario in which J Random Luser tries to
>> start the server twice and ends up with two autovacuum daemons attached
>> to the same postmaster. I'm not sure if this is possible, probable,
>> or dangerous ... but it s
Tom Lane wrote:
"Matthew T. O'Connor" writes:
In the windows service world, is there any reason pg_autovacuum should
ever give up?
I was a bit worried about the scenario in which J Random Luser tries to
start the server twice and ends up with two autovacuum daemons attached
to the same po
Matthew T. O'Connor schrieb:
In the windows service world, is there any reason pg_autovacuum should
ever give up? The reason I had it give up was so that it didn't
accidently run against a different postgresql instance. I don't think
that will happen in the windows service world. I think it s
"Matthew T. O'Connor" writes:
> In the windows service world, is there any reason pg_autovacuum should
> ever give up?
I was a bit worried about the scenario in which J Random Luser tries to
start the server twice and ends up with two autovacuum daemons attached
to the same postmaster. I'm not
Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 06:57:54PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
(Five minutes at least has a defensible rationale, ie it's the default
checkpoint interval and we expect we can replay the log at least as
fast as it was created initially.)
Hmm, I
Dave Page wrote:
When starting as a service at boot time on Windows, pg_autovacuum may
fail to start because the PostgreSQL service is still starting up. This
patch causes the service to attempt a second connection 30 seconds after
the initial connection failure before giving up entirely.
In the
On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 06:57:54PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> (Five minutes at least has a defensible rationale, ie it's the default
> checkpoint interval and we expect we can replay the log at least as
> fast as it was created initially.)
Hmm, I remember Mark Wong from OSDL saying that it took to
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 06:57:54PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> (Five minutes at least has a defensible rationale, ie it's the default
>> checkpoint interval and we expect we can replay the log at least as
>> fast as it was created initially.)
> Hmm, I rem
"Dave Page" writes:
> When starting as a service at boot time on Windows, pg_autovacuum may
> fail to start because the PostgreSQL service is still starting up. This
> patch causes the service to attempt a second connection 30 seconds after
> the initial connection failure before giving up entirel
When starting as a service at boot time on Windows, pg_autovacuum may
fail to start because the PostgreSQL service is still starting up. This
patch causes the service to attempt a second connection 30 seconds after
the initial connection failure before giving up entirely.
Regards, Dave
startup_d
11 matches
Mail list logo
