Re: Turning recovery.conf into GUCs

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Alex Shulgin <ash(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Turning recovery.conf into GUCs
Date: 2015-01-16 12:43:43
Message-ID: CAB7nPqSAzZm+eHGD=jpUbtQ_82CfNm8j9DqT-MU5GcVRYkHgDg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 6:22 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> I have written similar logic, and while it's not pleasant, it's doable.
> This issue would really only go away if you don't use a file to signal
> recovery at all, which you have argued for, but which is really a
> separate and more difficult problem.
Moving this patch to the next CF and marking it as returned with
feedback for current CF as there is visibly no consensus reached.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2015-01-16 12:45:48 Re: Turning recovery.conf into GUCs
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2015-01-16 12:26:40 Re: 9.5: Better memory accounting, towards memory-bounded HashAgg