Re: Hot Standby and VACUUM FULL

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Hot Standby and VACUUM FULL
Date: 2010-02-03 17:10:11
Message-ID: 1265217011.1729.2407.camel@ebony
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 11:50 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:

> I've concluded that that's too large a change to undertake for 9.0

The purpose of this was to make the big changes in 9.0. If we aren't
going to do that it seems like we shouldn't bother at all.

So why not flip back to the easier approach of make something work for
HS only and then do everything you want to do in the next release? The
burst radius of the half-way changes you are proposing seems high in
comparison.

--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alex Hunsaker 2010-02-03 17:18:51 Re: Add on_trusted_init and on_untrusted_init to plperl UPDATED [PATCH]
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2010-02-03 17:07:09 Re: Recent vendor SSL renegotiation patches break PostgreSQL