Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf
Date: 2011-11-01 12:14:47
Message-ID: CA+U5nM+=m2h+Qf5Pr4bp+-3ovjV_riE2zgeN0oCqSRS0Hs2P9w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 7:46 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> If you change a parameter that only has effect during recovery then
>> must get an error if it is changed during normal running.
>
> I don't see why.  If you're in normal running and someone changes a
> parameter that is irrelevant during normal running, that should be a
> no-op, not an error.

How will it be made into a no-op, except by having a specific flag to
show that it is irrelevant during normal running?

Fujii is saying we only need to mark GUCs if we keep recovery.conf. I
am saying we need to mark them whatever we do elsewhere.

--
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2011-11-01 12:19:39 Re: IDLE in transaction introspection
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2011-11-01 12:11:09 Avoiding shutdown checkpoint at failover