| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: recovery_connections cannot start (was Re: master in standby mode croaks) |
| Date: | 2010-04-23 22:30:00 |
| Message-ID: | 18410.1272061800@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
> <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>> So my proposal would be:
>>
>> wal_mode=crash/archive/standby
>> archive_mode=on/off # if on, wal_mode must be >= 'archive'
>> archive_command='command'
>> max_wal_senders=<integer> # if > 0, wal_mode must be >= 'archive'
> As a general design comment, I think we should avoid still having an
> archive_mode GUC but having it do something different. If we're going
> to change the semantics, we should also change the name, maybe to
> "archiving".
Agreed on the general point, but AFAICS that proposal keeps the meaning
of archive_mode the same as it was.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-04-23 22:38:03 | Re: Postgres stats collector showing high disk I/O |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2010-04-23 22:28:03 | Re: Postgres stats collector showing high disk I/O |