Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf
Date: 2011-11-02 01:11:56
Message-ID: 4EB098DC.8050401@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 11/1/11 12:29 PM, Robert Treat wrote:
> "Starting in 9.2, you should use pg_ctl standby to launch your
> database for normal operations and/or in cases where you are writing
> init scripts to control your production databases. For backwards
> compatibility, if you require the old behavior of using a
> recovery.conf, we would recommend you use pg_ctl start instead".

Gah.

There is no way we're getting distro packagers to switch from pg_ctl
start. Also, a lot of distros use the "postgres" command rather than
pg_ctl anything.

Messing with pg_ctl is not really a solution for this, since few people
in production environments call it directly. Nobody I know, anyway.

So Simon's suggested compromise still puts backwards compatibility ahead
of promoting the new API. This would result in nobody supporting the
new API until the day we remove the old one from the code.

I think adding "recovery_conf_location = ''" to postgresql.conf is a
much better compromise. Assuming we can stand the code complexity ...

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2011-11-02 01:45:32 Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2011-11-02 00:58:48 Is there a good reason we don't have INTERVAL 'infinity'?