| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Hot Standby and handling max_standby_delay |
| Date: | 2010-01-16 18:20:37 |
| Message-ID: | 1263666037.26654.50527.camel@ebony |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 2010-01-16 at 11:37 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > I'm wondering if it wouldn't just be easier to put in a plugin for
> > recovery conflict handling, so the user can decide what to do
> > themselves. That seems like a better plan than chewing through these
> > issues now.
>
> Making it a plugin doesn't solve anything. This is not the kind of
> thing where people can come up with some random policy and it will
> work well. Anyone competent to invent a better policy would be quite
> capable of modifying the source to suit themselves.
Agreed, with some regrets.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-01-16 18:47:45 | Re: quoting psql varible as identifier |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-01-16 17:51:37 | Re: Hot Standby and handling max_standby_delay |