Re: Controlling hot standby

From: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Controlling hot standby
Date: 2009-01-23 16:26:14
Message-ID: 1232727974.23892.2.camel@huvostro
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, 2009-01-23 at 17:07 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Merlin Moncure wrote:
> > Is 'hot standby' going to be the official moniker for the feature?
> > (not 'standby replication', or something else?). I wonder if we
> > should pick something more descriptive.
>
> Could also be something like "allow_connections_during_recovery".
>
> I'd keep the word "replication" out of this..

I suspect that it is used much more during "hot standby" than during
simple "recovery", which would mean something you do after unclean
shutdown or when restoring from backup.

maybe allow_hot_slaves ;)

--
------------------------------------------
Hannu Krosing http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Scalability and Availability
Services, Consulting and Training

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2009-01-23 16:28:26 Re: Controlling hot standby
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2009-01-23 16:22:21 Re: Hot Standby (v9d)