Re: [RFC] Should we fix postmaster to avoid slow shutdown? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Ashutosh Bapat
Subject Re: [RFC] Should we fix postmaster to avoid slow shutdown?
Date
Msg-id CAFjFpRcgfErt6ZuDAt2GzTHgJjPaXFiRXrBzdVzDF888+qZ_UA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [RFC] Should we fix postmaster to avoid slow shutdown?  ("Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa.takay@jp.fujitsu.com>)
Responses Re: [RFC] Should we fix postmaster to avoid slow shutdown?  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 5:16 AM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki
<tsunakawa.takay@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> From: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
>> [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Ashutosh Bapat
>> I have changed some comments around this block. See attached patch.
>> Let me know if that looks good.
>
> Thanks, it looks good.
>
Thanks. The patch 02_close_listen... closes the listen sockets
explicitly when it's known that postmaster is going to stop all the
children and then die. I have tried to see, if there's a possibility
that it closes the listen sockets but do not actually die, thus
causing a server which doesn't accept any connections and doesn't die.
But I have not found that possibility.

I do not have any further comments about both the patches. None else
has volunteered to review the patch till now. So, marking the entry as
ready for committer.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Fix checkpoint skip logic on idle systems by tracking LSN progress
Next
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Remove the comment on the countereffectiveness of large shared_buffers on Windows