| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Sergei Kornilov <sk(at)zsrv(dot)org>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pgsql: Integrate recovery.conf into postgresql.conf |
| Date: | 2018-11-27 12:45:20 |
| Message-ID: | c17e63ce-b78a-dbb5-8fd1-30b2984a53b4@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On 27/11/2018 13:29, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 27/11/2018 10:10, Sergei Kornilov wrote:
>> Hello
>>
>>>> - recovery_target = immediate was replaced with recovery_target_immediate bool GUC
>>>
>>> Why?
>> Due this comment: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20181126172118.GY3415%40tamriel.snowman.net
>>> I've not been following this very closely, but seems like
>>> recovery_target_string is a bad idea.. Why not just make that
>>> 'recovery_target_immediate' and make it a boolean? Having a GUC that's
>>> only got one valid value seems really odd.
>
> It is a bit odd, but that's the way it's been, and I don't see a reason
> to change it as part of this fix. We are attempting to fix the way the
> GUC parameters are parsed, not change the name and meaning of the
> parameters themselves.
The attached seems to be the simplest way to fix this. (Needs
documentation updates, test updates, error message refinement.)
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| 0001-WIP-Only-allow-one-recovery-target-setting.patch | text/plain | 3.3 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Banck | 2018-11-27 13:09:05 | Re: pgsql: Add TAP tests for pg_verify_checksums |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2018-11-27 12:29:27 | Re: pgsql: Integrate recovery.conf into postgresql.conf |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Etsuro Fujita | 2018-11-27 12:55:09 | postgres_fdw: oddity in costing aggregate pushdown paths |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-11-27 12:34:40 | Re: Use durable_unlink for .ready and .done files for WAL segment removal |