Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Hot Standby and handling max_standby_delay

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Hot Standby and handling max_standby_delay
Date: 2010-01-16 16:37:02
Message-ID: 18899.1263659822@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> I'm wondering if it wouldn't just be easier to put in a plugin for
> recovery conflict handling, so the user can decide what to do
> themselves. That seems like a better plan than chewing through these
> issues now. 

Making it a plugin doesn't solve anything.  This is not the kind of
thing where people can come up with some random policy and it will
work well.  Anyone competent to invent a better policy would be quite
capable of modifying the source to suit themselves.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Stefan KaltenbrunnerDate: 2010-01-16 17:10:33
Subject: buildfarm compiler warnings
Previous:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2010-01-16 16:22:57
Subject: Re: Hot Standby and handling max_standby_delay

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group