| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Hot standby, RestoreBkpBlocks and cleanup locks |
| Date: | 2009-01-15 17:10:04 |
| Message-ID: | 1232039404.31921.70.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2009-01-15 at 18:16 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> Is the first really useful? I would understand "advance until next
> cleanup record *that would block/kill queries*", but why would you
> want to advance until the next cleanup record?
Minor difference there, but noted.
> Anyway, if it is useful, you could do the pausing in
> XactResolveRecoveryConflicts, too.
Well that spreads code around that was previously fairly tight, which
I'm not that happy with but I'll do as you suggest. We need to crack on
now.
I want to keep the feature at least until we have some serious feedback
in the beta phase that it isn't necessary. Usability is close behind
correctness and robustness.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2009-01-15 17:24:33 | Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2009-01-15 17:08:15 | Re: Visibility map and freezing |