On 27.04.2012 21:56, Tom Lane wrote:
Magnus Hagander<mag...@hagander.net> writes:
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 20:48, Tom Lane<t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
I'm not necessarily opposed to commandeering the name "smart" for the
new behavior, so that what we have to find a name for is the old "smart"
behavior. How about
slow - allow existing sessions to finish (old "smart")
How about "wait" instead of "slow"?
I kinda liked "slow" vs "fast", but if you think that's too cute ...
("wait" doesn't seem very good, though, since all these except immediate
are waiting, just for different things.)
All the modes indeed wait (except for immediate), so I think it would
make sense to define the modes in terms of *what* they wait for.
wait sessions - allow existing sessions to finish (old "smart")
wait transactions - allow existing transactions to finish (new)
wait checkpoint - kill active queries
wait none - unclean shutdown
Hmm, the latter two are perhaps a bit confusing. So maybe:
wait_sessions - allow existing sessions to finish (old "smart")
wait_transactions - allow existing transactions to finish (new)
fast - kill active queries
immediate - unclean shutdown
Just thinking out loud here..
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
