Re: [GENERAL] Postgres 10.1 fails to start: server did not start intime - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Christoph Berg
Subject Re: [GENERAL] Postgres 10.1 fails to start: server did not start intime
Date
Msg-id 20171112191844.4rry32vdtxzi6crj@msg.df7cb.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [GENERAL] Postgres 10.1 fails to start: server did not start in time  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [GENERAL] Postgres 10.1 fails to start: server did not start in time  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-general
Re: Tom Lane 2017-11-12 <20802.1510513605@sss.pgh.pa.us>
> Agreed, but I think Peter has a point: why is there a timeout at all,
> let alone one as short as 30 seconds?  Since systemd doesn't serialize
> service starts unnecessarily, there seems little value in giving up
> quickly.  And we know that cases such as crash recovery may take more
> than that.

The default systemd timeout seems to be 90s. I have already changed
the systemd timeout to infinity (start) and 1h (stop), so only the
default pg_ctl timeout remains (60s), which I'd rather not override
unilaterally.

https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-postgresql/postgresql-common.git/tree/systemd/postgresql@.service#n18

That said, isn't 60s way too small for shutting down larger clusters?
And likewise for starting?

Christoph


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

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Karsten Hilbert
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] pg on Debian servers
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Postgres 10.1 fails to start: server did not start in time