Re: Multiplexing SUGUSR1 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Stark
Subject Re: Multiplexing SUGUSR1
Date
Msg-id 1199EE02-CEC5-4B57-8DDF-C2C8D4E1B439@enterprisedb.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Multiplexing SUGUSR1  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Responses Re: Multiplexing SUGUSR1  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 7 Jan 2009, at 09:47, Bruce Momjian <bruce@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.

-- 
Greg


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Hiroshi Saito"
Date:
Subject: Re: Solve a problem of LC_TIME of windows.
Next
From: "Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
Subject: Re: Do we still need constraint_exclusion?