| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful |
| Date: | 2010-05-08 19:40:09 |
| Message-ID: | 201005081940.o48Je9w10516@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 2:48 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> > I think the concensus is to change this setting to a boolean. ?If you
> > don't want to do it, I am sure we can find someone who will.
>
> I still think we should revert to Tom's original proposal.
And Tom's proposal was to do it on WAL slave arrival time? If we could
get agreement from everyone that that is the proper direction, fine, but
I am hearing things like plugins, and other complexity that makes it
seem we are not getting closer to an agreed solution, and without
agreement, the simplest approach seems to be just to remove the part we
can't agree upon.
I think the big question is whether this issue is significant enough
that we should ignore our policy of no feature design during beta.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-05-08 19:46:51 | Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-05-08 19:30:07 | Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful |