Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: pg_retainxlog for inclusion in 9.3?

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_retainxlog for inclusion in 9.3?
Date: 2013-01-04 18:13:59
Message-ID: 50E71BE7.1080502@gmx.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 1/3/13 12:30 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>> Any particular reason? It goes pretty tightly together with
>> pg_receivexlog, which is why I'd prefer putting it alongside that one.
>> But if you have a good argument against it, I can change my mind :)
> 
> Mostly that it seems like a hack, and I suspect we may come up with a
> better way to do this in the future.

It does seem like a hack.  Couldn't this be implemented with a backend
switch instead?

Also, as a small practical matter, since this is a server-side program
(since it's being used as archive_command), we shouldn't put it into the
pg_basebackup directory, because that would blur the lines about what to
install where, in particular for the translations.




In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Dong YeDate: 2013-01-04 18:53:32
Subject: Re: dynamic SQL - possible performance regression in 9.2
Previous:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2013-01-04 18:07:37
Subject: Re: Re: Proposal: Store "timestamptz" of database creation on "pg_database"

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group