From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: recovery.conf location |
Date: | 2010-09-29 15:02:47 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTi=+FfrmGKHVMSUg3fWMmTtqD1iF9kKgZw05AzdC@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> The idea of relying on the existence of recovery.conf to determine
>>> whether we should continue recovery forever or switch to normal
>>> running seems somewhat klunky to me. It mixes up settings with
>>> control information. Maybe the control information should move to
>>> pg_control, and the settings to postgresql.conf. *waves hands*
>
>> You mean to move standby_mode to postgresql.conf, and determine
>> whether the server should start in standby mode or not by considering
>> of standby_mode and the status information in pg_control?
>
> I think keeping the status information in a transient text file may
> still be a good design choice. If you push it into pg_control it will
> be impossible to modify by hand.
It could be done with a trivial tool, though.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Itagaki Takahiro | 2010-09-29 15:05:37 | Re: operator dependency of commutator and negator |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-09-29 15:01:35 | Re: Path question |