Re: [HACKERS] Should we eliminate or reduce HUP from docs? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Should we eliminate or reduce HUP from docs?
Date
Msg-id 20170310200230.cpk6zp2edythpak2@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to [HACKERS] Should we eliminate or reduce HUP from docs?  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Should we eliminate or reduce HUP from docs?  ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Joshua D. Drake wrote:

> I am a bad speaker, I am writing a talk three weeks before the conference
> (as opposed to on the plane).

Hah.

> I noticed in the docs we still reference the
> passing of SIGHUP for reloading conf file but we now have pg_reload_conf();
> 
> It seems the use of pg_reload_conf() would provide a better canonical
> interface to our users. Especially those users who are not used to
> interacting with the OS (Windows, Oracle etc...) for databases.

There are several ways to cause a config file reload (pg_ctl reload,
pg_reload_conf, direct SIGHUP).  We could have a section in docs listing
them all, and then all the other places that say a reload needs to occur
simply refer the reader to that section.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Should we eliminate or reduce HUP from docs?
Next
From: Magnus Hagander
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Need a builtin way to run all tests faster manner