| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: DeArchiver process |
| Date: | 2011-11-04 09:15:42 |
| Message-ID: | CA+U5nMKBqarfzkXvfCgbhhRhvEy2m-HXk1096ss7E9ZLygn8rw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 2:36 AM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> If we introduce "walrestore" process, pg_standby seems no longer useful.
> We should get rid of it?
Removing things too quickly can cause problems. There's no harm done
by keeping it a while longer.
I agree it should go, just want to be absolutely clear that its no
longer needed for any use case.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Miroslav Šimulčík | 2011-11-04 09:20:06 | Storing original rows before update or delete |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2011-11-04 07:15:28 | Re: IDLE in transaction introspection |