From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alex Shulgin <ash(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Turning recovery.conf into GUCs |
Date: | 2014-11-21 18:54:03 |
Message-ID: | 20141121185403.GJ28859@tamriel.snowman.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Josh Berkus (josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com) wrote:
> > Either way, from the code it is clear that we only stay in recovery if
> > standby_mode is directly turned on. This makes the whole check for a
> > specially named file unnecessary, IMO: we should just check the value of
> > standby_mode (which is off by default).
>
> So, what happens when someone does "pg_ctl promote"? Somehow
> standby_mode needs to get set to "off". Maybe we write "standby_mode =
> off" to postgresql.auto.conf?
Uhh, and then not work for the sane folks who disable
postgresql.auto.conf? No thanks..
> HOWEVER, there's a clear out for this with conf.d. If we enable conf.d
> by default, then we can simply put recovery settings in conf.d, and
> since that specific file (which can have whatever name the user chooses)
> will not be part of backups, it would have the same advantage as
> recovery.conf, without the drawbacks.
conf.d is a possibility, but there may be environments where the
postgres users doesn't have access to write into the conf.d directrory..
Not sure if that'd be an issue for what you're suggesting but wanted to
point it out.
Thanks,
Stephen
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2014-11-21 18:59:23 | Re: Turning recovery.conf into GUCs |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2014-11-21 18:51:40 | Re: pg_multixact not getting truncated |