From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Request for vote to move forward with recovery.conf overhaul |
Date: | 2013-03-13 11:50:54 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqRUsbg_4xXkxKHeLiugF-bQQg7Tup6Mqug2Yv=B7GNmLQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi all,
Please find attached an updated patch doing what is written below.
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Robert wrote a good summary:
> 1. Get rid of recovery.conf - error out if it is seen
> 2. For each parameter that was previously a recovery.conf parameter, make
> it a GUC
> 3. For the parameter that was "does recovery.conf exist?", replace it with
> "does standby.enabled exist?".
>
There are still a couple of things missing:
- pg_basebackup supports an option --write-recovery-conf, I haven't
modified anything yet, but I think that we should replace that by an option
that write standby.enabled in base backup and adds the relevant parameters
in postgresql.conf. Any input on that is welcome.
- no migration guide is written yet. Where to write it? I think I will need
some help here...
- The current error message if recovery.conf is found in data folder is
that:
+ if (AllocateFile(RECOVERY_COMMAND_FILE, "r") != NULL)
+ ereport(FATAL,
+ (errmsg("\"%s\" is not supported anymore as
a recovery method",
+ RECOVERY_COMMAND_FILE),
+ errdetail("Refer to appropriate
documentation about migration methods")));
Any better ideas?
I found some inconsistent behavior when a slave had no standby.enabled
files and recovery settings: the slave with "hot_standby = on" tried to
recover WAL files from archives instead of failing with errors of the type
"could not locate required checkpoint record" and then stop. This is fixed.
Regards,
--
Michael
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
20130313_recovery_guc.patch | application/octet-stream | 97.1 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2013-03-13 12:04:48 | Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY |
Previous Message | robins | 2013-03-13 10:11:53 | Re: Add some regression tests for SEQUENCE |