Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>, Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful
Date: 2010-05-14 21:51:18
Message-ID: 4BEDC5D6.6030800@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


>> This would be OK as long as we document it well. We patched the
>> shutdown the way we did specifically because Fujii thought it would be
>> an easy fix; if it's complicated, we should revert it and document the
>> issue for DBAs.
>
> I don't understand this comment.

In other words, I'm saying that it's not critical that we troubleshoot
this for 9.0. Revering Fujii's patch, if it's not working, is an option.

--
-- Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://www.pgexperts.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Crabtree 2010-05-14 21:52:02 Re: Generating Lots of PKs with nextval(): A Feature Proposal
Previous Message Robert Haas 2010-05-14 21:32:15 Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful