Message-ID: <5461087E.6090003@vmware.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 20:48:30 +0200
From: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>
Organization: VMware
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
 rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>, Peter Eisentraut
 <peter_e@gmx.net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: remove pg_standby?
References: <545946E9.8060504@gmx.net> <5460FAFF.2000805@commandprompt.com>
In-Reply-To: <5460FAFF.2000805@commandprompt.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

On 11/10/2014 07:50 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> On 11/04/2014 01:36 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>
>> While we're talking about removing old things, is there any use left for
>> pg_standby?
>
> -1.
>
> A lot of people, a lot of customers use log shipping for various
> creative and business requirement setups.

Yes, but do they use pg_standby to implement it? If they do, why?

pg_standby is more configurable than the built-in standby_mode=on. You 
can set the sleep time, for example, while standby_mode=on uses a 
hard-coded delay of 5 s. And pg_standby has a configurable maximum wait 
time. And as Fujii pointed out, the built-in system will print an 
annoying message to the log every time it attempts to restore a file. 
Nevertheless, 99% of users would probably be happy with the built-in thing.

- Heikki


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers