| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful |
| Date: | 2010-05-04 23:06:00 |
| Message-ID: | 1273014360.4535.3069.camel@ebony |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 18:53 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I think you missed the point: "do nothing" is not a viable option.
> I was proposing something that seemed simple enough to be safe to
> drop into 9.0 at this point.
I've posted a patch that meets your stated objections. If you could
review that, this could be done in an hour.
There are other ways, but you'll need to explain a proposal in enough
detail that we're clear what you actually mean.
> I'm less convinced that what Simon is proposing is safe enough.
Which proposal?
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Smith | 2010-05-04 23:26:41 | Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-05-04 22:53:33 | Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful |