| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Guillaume Smet <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: New trigger option of pg_standby |
| Date: | 2009-04-21 11:28:22 |
| Message-ID: | 49EDADD6.1090006@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs wrote:
> If you do this, then you would have to change the procedure written into
> the 8.3 docs also. Docs aren't backpatchable.
>
> What you propose is *better* than raw pg_standby is now, but still not
> enough in all cases, as I think you know.
No, I don't. What is the case where it doesn't work?
> Simple isn't the requirement here, is it?
Simplicity is always a virtue, because it leads to maintainability.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2009-04-21 11:36:32 | Re: Extend PL/pgSQL |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2009-04-21 11:25:50 | Re: New trigger option of pg_standby |