Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C4986504FD; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 19:09:17 -0400 (AST) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 81660-06; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 19:09:14 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from alexis.jtlnet.com (alexis.jtlnet.com [69.36.9.81]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B75C6504C4; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 19:09:14 -0400 (AST) Received: from [192.168.10.103] (cpe-075-177-179-038.nc.res.rr.com [::ffff:75.177.179.38]) (TLS: TLSv1/SSLv3,256bits,AES256-SHA) by alexis.jtlnet.com with esmtp; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:06:08 -0500 id 000802C4.491A0FE0.00003AA5 Message-ID: <491A1095.1030706@dunslane.net> Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:09:09 -0500 From: Andrew Dunstan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.8.0.12) Gecko/20071019 Fedora/1.0.9-3.fc6 pango-text SeaMonkey/1.0.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bruce Momjian CC: Simon Riggs , Tom Lane , Heikki Linnakangas , Martin Zaun , Greg Smith , Kevin Grittner , Dave Page , PostgreSQL-development , List pgsql-patches Subject: Re: [PATCHES] odd output in restore mode References: <200811112224.mABMOfj27949@momjian.us> In-Reply-To: <200811112224.mABMOfj27949@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-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200811/821 X-Sequence-Number: 127533 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 >> >> > >