Received: from maia.hub.org (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A924632A7E for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 11:45:23 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 53325-05 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 11:45:22 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from exprod7og107.obsmtp.com (exprod7og107.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.167]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D72DA632957 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 11:45:21 -0300 (ADT) Received: from source ([74.125.78.148]) by exprod7ob107.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKSh1R/4WDtD8TOguMrRbZUQ/vPE1CMwaF@postini.com; Wed, 27 May 2009 07:45:21 PDT Received: by ey-out-1920.google.com with SMTP id 13so1029931eye.46 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 07:45:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.210.35.17 with SMTP id i17mr1801438ebi.85.1243435164700; Wed, 27 May 2009 07:39:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?80.223.212.7? (dsl-hkibrasgw2-fed4df00-7.dhcp.inet.fi [80.223.212.7]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 23sm2354787eya.49.2009.05.27.07.39.22 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 27 May 2009 07:39:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4A1D5099.8070106@enterprisedb.com> Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 17:39:21 +0300 From: Heikki Linnakangas Organization: EnterpriseDB User-Agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090103) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bruce Momjian CC: Simon Riggs , Tom Lane , Fujii Masao , Guillaume Smet , Peter Eisentraut , Kevin Grittner , pgsql-hackers Subject: Re: New trigger option of pg_standby References: <200905271351.n4RDpuV12108@momjian.us> In-Reply-To: <200905271351.n4RDpuV12108@momjian.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200905/1112 X-Sequence-Number: 138654 Bruce Momjian wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: >> Simon Riggs wrote: >>> On Wed, 2009-05-27 at 09:13 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: >>>> I think the big frustration is that this issue was first brought up >>>> March 25 and it took two months to resolve it, at which point we were in >>>> beta. I think many hoped a better idea would emerge but often that just >>>> doesn't happen and we have to do the best fix we can and move on. >>> I agree, very frustrating. Why do you bring it up again now? >> Wny not? We are not going to improve unless we face our faults. > > Oh, and I am backlogged on email, which is why I didn't mention it a > week ago when this thread was active (which I think was your point). :-) Did you catch up the backlog far enough to see that Simon coded and I committed the patch to add "recovery_end_command" just before beta2? So it's in 8.4 now (http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/20090514203109.8EBA2754067@cvs.postgresql.org). I agree we could've should've handled this more promptly, and I'll take my part of the blame for that. I let the various proposed patches sit for long times before reviewing them thoroughly, partly because I was busy and partly because I didn't feel good about the proposed approaches. I think what went in in the end is pretty simple and robust, but it's a shame we had to rush to get it into beta2, after sitting on our thumbs for months. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com