From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: 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: Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Cc: List pgsql-patches <pgsql-patches@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] odd output in restore mode
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:09:09 -0500
Message-ID: <491A1095.1030706@dunslane.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200811112224.mABMOfj27949@momjian.us>
References: <200811112224.mABMOfj27949@momjian.us>
I have a fairly large TODO list, and Simon has thrown in the towel (and
I imagine he also has a large TODO list).
anyone else want to step in?
cheers
andrew
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Have we made any progress on this, namely better documentation and
> removing the Win32 delay code?
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>> 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, bruce@momjian.us, simon@2ndquadrant.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, heikki@enterprisedb.com, Martin.Zaun@Sun.COM, gsmith@gregsmith.com, Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov, dpage@pgadmin.org, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] odd output in restore mode
In-Reply-To: <491A1095.1030706@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