| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tomonari Katsumata <t(dot)katsumata1122(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomonari Katsumata <katsumata(dot)tomonari(at)po(dot)ntts(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Should we remove "not fast" promotion at all? |
| Date: | 2013-08-06 04:07:22 |
| Message-ID: | 13818.1375762042@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> FWIW I'd rather keep plain promotion for a release or two. TBH, I have a
>> bit of trust issues regarding the new method, and I'd like to be able to
>> test potential issues against a stock postgres by doing a normal instead
>> of a fast promotion.
> So we should add new option specifying the promotion mode, into pg_ctl?
> Currently pg_ctl cannot trigger the normal promotion.
It would be silly to add such an option if we want to remove the old mode
in a release or two.
I think what Andres is suggesting is to leave it as-is for 9.4 and then
remove the old code in 9.5 or 9.6. Which seems prudent to me.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2013-08-06 04:09:01 | Re: Should we remove "not fast" promotion at all? |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2013-08-06 03:56:48 | Re: Should we remove "not fast" promotion at all? |