Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I don't think we want that. IMHO the preferred behavior if the
>> postmaster crashes should be like a "smart shutdown" --- you don't spawn
>> any more backends (obviously) but existing backends should be allowed to
>> run until their clients exit. That's how things have always worked
>> anyway...
> ... In the case of a postmaster crash, I think
> something in the system is so wrong that I'd prefer an immediate shutdown.
Surely some other people have opinions on this? Hello out there?
regards, tom lane
