Horton

Re: when the startup process doesn't

Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais <jgdr@dalibo.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2021-04-21T20:00:32Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Hi,

On 2021-04-21 15:51:38 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> It does seem like we have some trade-offs here to weigh, but
> pg_control is indeed quite small..

What do you mean by that? That the overhead of writing it out more
frequently wouldn't be too bad? Or that we shouldn't "unnecessarily" add
more fields to it?

Greetings,

Andres Freund

Commits

  1. Un-revert "Disable STARTUP_PROGRESS_TIMEOUT in standby mode."

  2. Revert "Disable STARTUP_PROGRESS_TIMEOUT in standby mode."

  3. Disable STARTUP_PROGRESS_TIMEOUT in standby mode.

  4. Fix race condition in startup progress reporting.

  5. Report progress of startup operations that take a long time.

  6. Add enable_timeout_every() to fire the same timeout repeatedly.