| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Gurjeet Singh <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com>, PGSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_standby for 8.2 (with last restart point) |
| Date: | 2008-03-28 04:54:09 |
| Message-ID: | 24405.1206680049@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> writes:
> ... That was a small change in a utility that should never be run on a
> production system. You're trying to get a change made to the code path
> people rely on for their *backups*. Good luck with that.
While I quite agree with Greg's comments about not changing stable
release branches unnecessarily, it seems that there's another
consideration in this case. If we don't back-patch %r then users
will have to rely on hacky scripts like the one posted upthread.
Is that really a net gain in reliability?
(I'm honestly not sure of the answer; I'm just thinking it might
be open to debate. In particular I don't remember how complicated
the patch to add %r was.)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gurjeet Singh | 2008-03-28 05:00:49 | Re: pg_standby for 8.2 (with last restart point) |
| Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2008-03-28 04:17:18 | Re: pg_standby for 8.2 (with last restart point) |