On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> The idea of relying on the existence of recovery.conf to determine
>>> whether we should continue recovery forever or switch to normal
>>> running seems somewhat klunky to me. It mixes up settings with
>>> control information. Maybe the control information should move to
>>> pg_control, and the settings to postgresql.conf. *waves hands*
>> You mean to move standby_mode to postgresql.conf, and determine
>> whether the server should start in standby mode or not by considering
>> of standby_mode and the status information in pg_control?
> I think keeping the status information in a transient text file may
> still be a good design choice. If you push it into pg_control it will
> be impossible to modify by hand.
It could be done with a trivial tool, though.
The Enterprise Postgres Company
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Itagaki Takahiro||Date: 2010-09-29 15:05:37|
|Subject: Re: operator dependency of commutator and negator|
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2010-09-29 15:01:35|
|Subject: Re: Path question|