| From: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: Document recovery_target_action behavior? |
| Date: | 2019-09-28 16:00:21 |
| Message-ID: | 03b825f5-ddb6-ece2-1f27-54d2730964e7@pgmasters.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 9/28/19 11:14 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 2:52 AM David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> wrote:
>
>> The question for the old versions: is this something that should be
>> fixed in the code or in the documentation?
>>
>> My vote is to make this explicit in the documentation, since changing
>> the recovery behavior in old versions could lead to nasty surprises.
>
> +1 to update the documentation.
OK, I'll put that on my list for after GA. This has been the behavior
since 9.1 so it hardly seems like an emergency.
The behavior change in 12 may be a surprise for users, though, perhaps
we should add something to the Streaming Replication and Recovery
changes section in the release notes?
Looping in Jonathan to see if he thinks that's a good idea.
Regards,
--
-David
david(at)pgmasters(dot)net
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2019-09-28 16:18:38 | Re: [DOC] Document concurrent index builds waiting on each other |
| Previous Message | Andrew Gierth | 2019-09-28 15:59:55 | Re: Possible bug: SQL function parameter in window frame definition |