On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 20:48, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 7:29 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> No, I'm not happy with that. Smart shutdown is defined to not affect
>>> current sessions. I'm fine with having a fourth mode that acts as you
>>> suggest (and, probably, even with making it the default); but not with
>>> taking away a behavior that people may well be relying on.
>
>> Agreed, but not sure what to call the new mode: "smarter"?
>
> I'm not necessarily opposed to commandeering the name "smart" for the
> new behavior, so that what we have to find a name for is the old "smart"
> behavior. How about
>
> slow - allow existing sessions to finish (old "smart")
How about "wait" instead of "slow"?
> smart - allow existing transactions to finish (new)
and still default, right?
> fast - kill active queries
> immediate - unclean shutdown
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
