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

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [GENERAL] Postgres 10.1 fails to start: server did not start in time
Date
Msg-id 6219.1510539538@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [GENERAL] Postgres 10.1 fails to start: server did not start intime  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-general
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> we could really do better than just wonder whether our signal to
> shutdown was received or not.  There probably should be a quite short
> timeout for the server to change status, and then a much longer one for
> that shutdown to finish.

While I don't want to just raise the timeout, I could get behind a more
thorough rethinking of the behavior there.
        regards, tom lane


-- 
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: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Multiple unnests in query
Next
From: John R Pierce
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Migrating plattaform