> So, how to resolve that conflict? I think it's better for the script
> default to cater to the manual-invocation case, because you're more
> likely to forget to add the switch when you're entering the command by
> hand. When pg_ctl is invoked from a system shutdown script, you only
> have to g
"Hiroshi Inoue" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> From: Peter Eisentraut [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Just curious. I
>> just think that waiting by default and smart shutdown don't really mix
>> well.
> Current behavior prevents manual shutdown from cancelling
> running sessions carelessly.
Seem
> > Just curious. I
> > just think that waiting by default and smart shutdown don't really mix
> > well.
> >
>
> Current behavior prevents manual shutdown from cancelling
> running sessions carelessly.
> OTOH it's the dba's responsibilty to write appropriate shutdown
> scripts and it's not goo
> -Original Message-
> From: Peter Eisentraut [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Hiroshi Inoue writes:
>
> > > Since there were no comments, I'm going to make fast shutdown
> the default.
> > >
> >
> > Oh I've misunderstood.
> > I object to the change.
>
> Do you feel the current behaviour
Hiroshi Inoue writes:
> > Since there were no comments, I'm going to make fast shutdown the default.
> >
>
> Oh I've misunderstood.
> I object to the change.
Do you feel the current behaviour is more intuitive? Just curious. I
just think that waiting by default and smart shutdown don't really
> -Original Message-
> From: Peter Eisentraut
>
> Since there were no comments, I'm going to make fast shutdown the default.
>
Oh I've misunderstood.
I object to the change.
Regards,
Hiroshi Inoue
