Re: Interaction of PITR backups and Bulkoperationsavoiding WAL

On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 04:57:18PM +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-03-09 at 11:47 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > > On Fri, 2007-03-09 at 11:15 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> It strikes me that allowing archive_command to be changed on the fly
> > >> might not be such a good idea though, or at least it shouldn't be
> > >> possible to flip it from empty to nonempty during live operation.
> >
> > > I'd rather fix it the proposed way than force a restart. ISTM wrong to
> > > have an availability feature cause downtime.
> >
> > I don't think that people are very likely to need to turn archiving on
> > and off on-the-fly. Your proposed solution introduces a great deal of
> > complexity (and risk of future bugs-of-omission, to say nothing of race
> > conditions) to solve a non-problem. We have better things to be doing
> > with our development time.
>
> It's certainly a quicker fix. Unless others object, I'll set
> archive_command to only be changeable at server startup.

I think the docs should also explain why it's server-start only, since
if someone wanted to they could circumvent the behavior by having
archive_command call a shell script that changes it's behavior.
--
Jim Nasby jim(at)nasby(dot)net
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)