On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 9:20 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 1 May 2013 11:25, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 8:49 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>> Make fast promotion the default promotion mode.
>>> Continue to allow a request for synchronous
>>> checkpoints as a mechanism in case of problems.
>>
>> Is there clean way to request synchronous checkpoint at the standby promotion?
>> I'm sure that we can do that by creating the file "promote" and
>> sending the SIGUSR1
>> signal to the postmaster. Or by using previous version of pg_ctl.
>> These are not clean
>> and would confuse users.
>
> I just removed the user interface at Heikki's request, so yes, I can
> see its not ideal interface.
>
> My wish was to have a mechanism should we need it.
>
> A third option would be to not have any way at all.
>
> What is your preference?
My preference is adding something like --full-checkpoint option into
pg_ctl promote.
As far as I understand Heikki's request correctly, he dislikes the
approach reusing
-m option in pg_ctl promote. That is, previous behavior of the promotion is not
"smarter" than current one, but we have to have specified "-m smart" to choose
the previous behavior of the promotion. ISTM that his this request makes sense.
So I'd like to propose to add new option which would not confuse
users, into pg_ctl
promote.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
