Re: 9.2 Cascading replication after slave promotion

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 9.2 Cascading replication after slave promotion
Date: 2012-08-14 02:24:48
Message-ID: 20120814022447.GT1267@tamriel.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

* Daniel Farina (daniel(at)heroku(dot)com) wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 5:32 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> > To date, I seem to be the only one convinced that this is an actual
> > deficiency ...
>
> It is an actual deficiency, and I am convinced.

Yeah, I think there's more people that agree with this use-case than you
seem to think.. That said, I appreciate that it's not a trivial thing
to support cleanly.

Thanks,

Stephen

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2012-08-14 02:33:58 Re: SIGFPE handler is naive
Previous Message Noah Misch 2012-08-14 02:14:11 Re: SIGFPE handler is naive