Now that the postmaster takes a noticeable amount of time to shut down,
I'm wondering if pg_ctl's default about whether or not to wait ought
to be reversed.  That is, "-w" would become the norm, and some new
switch ("-n" maybe) would be needed if you didn't want it to wait.

Comments?

			regards, tom lane

Thu, 07 Dec 2000 14:05:39 -0500
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Switch pg_ctl's default about waiting?
Tom Lane writes:

> Now that the postmaster takes a noticeable amount of time to shut down,
> I'm wondering if pg_ctl's default about whether or not to wait ought
> to be reversed.  That is, "-w" would become the norm, and some new
> switch ("-n" maybe) would be needed if you didn't want it to wait.

Two concerns:

1.  The waiting isn't very reliable as we recently found out.  (If you
wait on shutdown, then wait on startup would be default as well, no?)

2.  Why would you necessarily care to wait for shutdown?  Startup I can
see, but shutdown doesn't seem so important.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut      peter_e@gmx.net       http://yi.org/peter-e/


Thu, 7 Dec 2000 21:53:27 +0100 (CET)
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
Re: Switch pg_ctl's default about waiting?
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> 2.  Why would you necessarily care to wait for shutdown?  Startup I can
> see, but shutdown doesn't seem so important.

Well, maybe I'm the only one who has a script like
	pg_ctl -w stop
	cd ~/.../backend; make installbin
	pg_ctl start
but I got burnt regularly until I put -w in there ;-)

			regards, tom lane

Thu, 07 Dec 2000 16:08:33 -0500
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Switch pg_ctl's default about waiting? 