On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 5:50 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> A look at the code shows that the archiver only notices SIGHUP once
> per outer loop, so the change would only take effect once you catch up,
> which is not going to help much in this case. Possibly we should change
> it to check for SIGHUP after each archive_command execution.
>
> If you kill -9 the archiver process, the postmaster will just start
> a new one, but realize that that would result in two concurrent
> rsync's. It might work ok to kill -9 the archiver and the current
> rsync in the same command.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
I think I'll just wait it out, then sighup.
Thanks for looking into this.
