Re: WAL Info messages

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: WAL Info messages
Date: 2009-12-14 16:06:10
Message-ID: 268.1260806770@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> I definitely wouldn't presume that anybody using Hot Standby would
> necessarily want NOTIFY to reach the standby, especially if there was an
> overhead to doing so. If using NOTIFY is the favoured approach, I would
> add a separate parameter for it and/or an explicit option on NOTIFY.

Yeah, I had just come to the same conclusion: you'd want a separate
spigot handle on sending NOTIFY to WAL, regardless of any general flag
about HS.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Scott Bailey 2009-12-14 16:20:29 Re: Range types
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-12-14 15:56:13 Re: Streaming replication and non-blocking I/O