| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Steve Singer <ssinger_pg(at)sympatico(dot)ca>, Jun Ishiduka <ishizuka(dot)jun(at)po(dot)ntts(dot)co(dot)jp>, magnus(at)hagander(dot)net, heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, cedric(dot)villemain(dot)debian(at)gmail(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: Online base backup from the hot-standby |
| Date: | 2012-01-23 13:13:51 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZvQ-zCp-aHohdcQ5EzqZpFu1P-6py3T=rEu7aipLgJmg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 8:11 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 5:29 AM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> If many people think the patch is not acceptable without such a safeguard,
>> I will do that right now.
>
> That's my view. I think we ought to resolve this issue before commit,
> especially since it seems unclear that we know how to fix it.
Actually, never mind. On reading this more carefully, I'm not too
concerned about the possibility of people breaking it with pg_lesslog
or similar. But it should be solid if you use only the functionality
built into core.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2012-01-23 13:16:14 | Re: Removing freelist (was Re: Should I implement DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY?) |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2012-01-23 13:11:10 | Re: Online base backup from the hot-standby |