From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: s/recovery_connections/allow_standby_queries/, or something like that? |
Date: | 2010-04-29 17:49:15 |
Message-ID: | 15660.1272563355@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think a different name would help. The best idea I can come up with
>> on the spur of the moment is "allow_standby_queries", but I'm not sure
>> that can't be improved on. Comments?
> One objection to that name is that it also works during archive
> recovery, like during PITR, which is not a standby server. But that's
> probably a rare use case.
Huh, that is an interesting point. I think it might eventually be a
common use case: when you're trying to determine where to stop a PITR
recovery, it would be really nice to be able to roll forward to some
point, pause the recovery, and then snoop around in the database in
a read-only fashion before deciding whether to advance further. We
don't currently have a good mechanism for the pause-and-resume bit
but I bet something like walreceiver could be built to do that.
The "snoop around" part is already handled nicely by HS.
> +1 on changing it to something.
Any thoughts on what?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2010-04-29 17:55:35 | Re: s/recovery_connections/allow_standby_queries/, or something like that? |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-04-29 17:43:39 | Re: s/recovery_connections/allow_standby_queries/, or something like that? |