On 9/14/18 12:11 PM, Jeremy Schneider wrote:
On 9/14/18 10:04, Christophe Pettus wrote:
Thanks Christophe - even if it's not what Chris is running into, this is
is another good call-out.
It's important to distinguish here between the RDS parts and the
community PostgreSQL parts. I think for this thread it's just worth
pointing out that RDS automation/tooling will report the database in a
"modifying" state until it completes its management operations, however
the actual database unavailability is much shorter. RDS carefully
engineers their processes to minimize the actual database unavailability
itself.
Chris has run into a problem where the PostgreSQL processes did not shut
down, evidenced by the error messages he mentioned, and as a result his
database was actually unavailable to applications for an extended
period. This is uncommon and concerning.
This isn't the right forum for discussing the RDS bits; lets take that
to the AWS forums. It's not synchronous, but the time to complete
should absolutely be predictable within reasonable bounds depending on
the operation type. I don't know how anyone could use the platform
otherwise! If anyone is unable to establish bounded expectations for
some automated operation, I'd strongly encourage starting a thread on
the AWS forums or opening a support ticket.
Not sure I follow. RDS using Postgres is a set, so I am not sure you can
unbundle then when tracking down a bug.
On 9/14/18 09:27, Adrian Klaver wrote:
The thing is I do not remember any posts to this list mentioning the
same problem on a platform outside RDS. A quick search seems to
confirm that.
I've met folks from other large fleet operators at PG conferences. There
are all kinds of stories we don't find on the lists yet. :) Hopefully
we're all getting better about closing the loop and sharing stuff back -
that's part of the value large fleet operators can and should bring to
the community.
Hopefully sooner rather then later.
-Jeremy
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx
