| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Keepalive for max_standby_delay |
| Date: | 2010-06-28 07:17:48 |
| Message-ID: | 1277709468.25074.63629.camel@ebony |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2010-06-16 at 21:56 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 8:01 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> Yes, I'll get with it ...
>
> > Any update on this?
>
> Sorry, I've been a bit distracted by other responsibilities (libtiff
> security issues for Red Hat, if you must know). I'll get on it shortly.
I don't think the PostgreSQL project should wait any longer on this. If
it does we risk loss of quality in final release, assuming no slippage.
>From here, I will rework my patch of 31 May to
* use arrival time on standby as base for max_standby_delay
* make delay apply to both streaming and file cases
* min_standby_grace_period - min grace on every query, default 0
Decision time, so thoughts please?
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thom Brown | 2010-06-28 08:40:12 | Re: beta3 & the open items list |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2010-06-28 05:03:23 | Re: Why are these modules built without respecting my LDFLAGS? |