Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> That just needs to be polished into shape, and documentation.
Wow, cool! I don't know how but I've missed it.
> +1. Or maybe it would be better make it a separate binary, rather than part
> of pg_ctl.
Well the thinking was that nowadays we support initdb from pg_ctl, and
this is another kind of initdb, really.
> I linked above. Running queries requires connecting to a real database,
> which means that the user needs to have privileges to do that and you need
> to know the name of a valid database. Ideally this would all work through a
> replication connection. I think we should go with that from day one.
I didn't think about the "connecting to a real database" part of it,
versus using a dedicated REPLICATION connection/protocol, and to be
honest, I feared it was too much work. Seeing that you already did it,
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Kevin Grittner||Date: 2011-01-02 18:13:00|
|Subject: Re: management of large patches|
|Previous:||From: Simon Riggs||Date: 2011-01-02 17:43:02|
|Subject: Re: Sync Rep Design|