| From: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, 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 11:08:10 |
| Message-ID: | m2ipn0uov9.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> If we introduce "walrestore" process, pg_standby seems no longer useful.
pg_standby is one possible restore_command, right? I had understood
that walrestore would be the process that cares for running that
command, not another implementation of it.
That said, I would really like us to provide a default restore command,
so if you had any intend of handling the restoring command in the
walrestore process, by all means, go ahead :)
Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2011-11-04 11:14:10 | Re: DeArchiver process |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2011-11-04 10:22:45 | a tsearch issue |