Re: Postgres 8.3 archive_command

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD <Andreas(dot)Zeugswetter(at)s-itsolutions(dot)at>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Rudolf van der Leeden <vanderleeden(at)logicunited(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Postgres 8.3 archive_command
Date: 2007-11-22 09:51:08
Message-ID: 1195725068.4246.147.camel@ebony.site
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, 2007-11-22 at 10:34 +0100, Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD wrote:
> > I don't think that should even be a TODO item --- it seems far more
> > likely to provide a foot-gun than useful capability.
>
> On further reflection I think that initdb time is probably sufficient.
> Do you think that would be a reasonable TODO ?

I think you'd have to explain why this was needed. It was useful for
performance once, but not anymore.

There are many possible errors there, so not a road I would go down
without good reason. Extra configuration is just one more thing to go
wrong and one more thing for people to misconfigure.

--
Simon Riggs
2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2007-11-22 10:11:41 Re: strange bison, cannot remove reduce
Previous Message Gregory Stark 2007-11-22 09:50:48 Re: 8.3devel slower than 8.2 under read-only load