On Mon, 2009-10-19 at 10:53 -0600, Scott Marlowe wrote: > On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 10:44 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Brad Nicholson <bnichols@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> On Mon, 2009-10-19 at 12:07 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >>> That seems like a fundamentally stupid idea, unless you are unconcerned > >>> with the time and cost of getting the DB running again, which seemingly > >>> you are. > > > >> I disagree that this is fundamentally stupid. We are talking about a > >> situation where the server is about to die, HA solution kicks in and > >> moves it to standby. > > > > Moving it to standby immediately is a good idea, but it does not follow > > that you need to hit the DB over the head with a hammer. A fast-mode > > shutdown seems perfectly adequate. If it isn't, you're going to need > > nontrivial recovery effort anyhow. > > All of this is completely besides the point that a database that's > been shutdown immediately / had the power cord yanked comes back up > and doesn't start autovacuuming automatically, which seems a > non-optimal behaviour. It's also not going to endear us very much to the VLDB crowd - it will amounts to a multi-hour crash recovery for those folks while analyze regenerates statistics. -- Brad Nicholson 416-673-4106 Database Administrator, Afilias Canada Corp. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
