| From: | Ian Barwick <ian(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
| Cc: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Function to promote standby servers |
| Date: | 2018-10-26 02:36:00 |
| Message-ID: | cbd38450-2295-10a1-1f73-591a692ae0b0@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi
On 10/25/2018 09:47 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> And committed. I double-checked the code, and tweaked a bit the tests
> so as the test using wait_mode = false is removed as it did not seem
> worth the extra cycles. I also added a check on the return value of
> pg_promote when using the wait mode. Another thing was that the
> function needs to be parallel-restricted.
Documentation for this [*] says "Returns true if promotion is successful and false otherwise",
which is not correct if "wait" is false, as it will always return TRUE.
[*] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/functions-admin.html#FUNCTIONS-RECOVERY-CONTROL
Attached patch contains a suggested rewording to clarify this.
Regards
Ian Barwick
--
Ian Barwick http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| doc-pg-promote.patch | text/x-patch | 1.8 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Rowley | 2018-10-26 02:50:10 | Ordered Partitioned Table Scans |
| Previous Message | Ian Barwick | 2018-10-26 02:28:16 | Re: Function to promote standby servers |