On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:58 AM, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 9:43 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 2010-03-17 at 11:37 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>>> One awkward omission in the new built-in standby mode, mainly used for
>>> streaming replication, is that there is no easy way to delete old
>>> archived files like you do with the %r parameter to restore_command.
>> Would it be better to call this "archive_cleanup_command"? That might
>> help people understand the need for and the use of this parameter.
> This is bikeshedding but fwiw I like Simon's suggestion.
So, this thread is hanging out on our list of open items for 9.0. My
personal opinion on it is that I don't really care much one way or the
other. archive_cleanup_command does seem easier to understand, but
restartpoint_command has the advantage of describing exactly when it
gets run from a technical perspective, which might be a good thing,
too. Since nobody's felt motivated to do anything about this for two
and a half months and we've now been through two betas with it the way
it is, I'm inclined to say we should just leave it alone. On the
other hand, both of the people who voted in favor of changing it are
committers, and if one of them feels like putting in the effort to
change it, it won't bother me much, except that I feel it should get
done RSN. But one way or the other we need to make a decision and get
this off the list.
The Enterprise Postgres Company
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2010-06-08 21:24:46|
|Subject: Re: hot_standby = on |
|Previous:||From: Josh Berkus||Date: 2010-06-08 21:13:15|
|Subject: Re: How about closing some Open Items?|