From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
To: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Martin Zaun <Martin.Zaun@Sun.COM>
Cc: Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>
Cc: Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Cc: List pgsql-patches <pgsql-patches@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS]odd output in restore mode
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2008 10:27:21 -0400
Message-ID: <48946EC9.1010000@dunslane.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1217671669.3934.119.camel@ebony.t-mobile.de.>
References: <200807011520.m61FKhZ20311@momjian.us>
<48867904.9090001@sun.com>
<1216810783.3894.602.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant>
<48877AC0.7070603@enterprisedb.com>
<48873C7E.EE98.0025.0@wicourts.gov>
<Pine.GSO.4.64.0807281136140.26479@westnet.com>
<488DEE79.4010004@dunslane.net>
<488F28CB.8000201@enterprisedb.com>
<48909C16.6070401@sun.com>
<4891E2BC.203@enterprisedb.com>
<9981.1217521958@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<1217671669.3934.119.camel@ebony.t-mobile.de.>
Simon Riggs wrote:
> Well, this is a strange conclusion, leaving me slightly bemused.
>
> The discussion between Andrew and I at PGcon concluded that we would
> * document which other tools to use
> * remove the delay
>
> Now we have rejected the patch which does that, but then re-requested
> the exact same thing again.
>
> The patch interprets "remove the delay" as "remove the delay in a way
> which will not screw up existing users of pg_standby when they upgrade".
> Doing that requires us to have a configurable delay, which defaults to
> the current behaviour, but that can be set to zero (the recommended
> way). Which is what the patch implements.
>
> Andrew, Heikki: ISTM its time to just make the changes yourselves. This
> is just going round and round to no benefit. This doesn't warrant such a
> long discussion and review process.
>
You ought to know by now that the length and ferocity of the discussion
bears no relation at all to the importance of the subject ;-)
Personally, I think it's reasonable to provide the delay as long as it's
switchable, although I would have preferred zero to be the default. If
we remove it altogether then we force bigger changes on people who are
currently using Windows copy. But I can live with that since changing
their archive_command is the better path by far anyway, either to use
Gnu cp or the copy / rename trick.
cheers
andrew
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-patches@postgresql.org
Cc: andrew@dunslane.net, simon@2ndquadrant.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, heikki@enterprisedb.com, Martin.Zaun@Sun.COM, gsmith@gregsmith.com, Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov, bruce@momjian.us, dpage@pgadmin.org, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS]odd output in restore mode
In-Reply-To: <48946EC9.1010000@dunslane.net>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox