Re: Proposal for changes to recovery.conf API

On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 11:31 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I liked Heikki's suggestion (at some point quite a while ago now) of
> recovery_target = 'xid 123' or recovery_target='lsn 0/723' or
> whatever.

My vote goes for having two separate parameters, because as we know
that there will be always two fields in this parameter, there is no
need to complicate the GUC machinery with a new special case when
parsing its value. Having two parameters would also make easier the
life of anybody maintaining a library parsing parameters for values
and doing in-place updates of those values. For example, I maintain a
set of routines in Python doing that with some fancy regex routines,
and that would avoid having to handle a special case when willing to
update for example the same recovery target with a new value.
--
Michael