Re: New trigger option of pg_standby

From: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: New trigger option of pg_standby
Date: 2009-03-25 09:32:12
Message-ID: 3f0b79eb0903250232y34c06a77jafdc17a45d1e9d1f@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Guillaume Smet
<guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 9:44 AM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Yeah, I agree... but there may be scripts for warm-standby based on
>> the existing default behavior. So, I didn't make a new trigger the default.
>
> I don't use pg_standby personnaly but I admit I'm quite surprised by
> the current behaviour. I'm pretty sure a lot of the current users
> would be surprised too.

The current behavior is documented as follows, so it may be
taken for granted by some users. I think that we shouldn't
ignore such users.

---------------
Specify a trigger file whose presence should cause recovery to
end whether or not the next WAL file is available.
---------------

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2009-03-25 09:39:34 Re: Unsupported effective_io_concurrency platforms
Previous Message Tatsuhito Kasahara 2009-03-25 09:08:43 display previous query string of idle-in-transaction