|From:||Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>|
|To:||Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org|
|Subject:||Re: pg_start_backup and pg_stop_backup Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make CheckRequiredParameterValues() depend upon correct|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox|
On Wed, 2010-04-28 at 11:11 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > IOW I think that the requirement in pg_start_backup shouldn't be relaxed
> > without some more thought/work.
> Yeah, I was talking to Bruce about that this AM, and it seems like a
> feature we *need* to have ... for 9.1.
> I'm sufficiently concerned about the amount of flux HS/SR is in right
> now that I'd like to declare it "good enough" and move towards release.
> Otherwise we'll tinker with it forever and there will be no 9.0.
> "Release early, release often" *is* the OSS mantra, after all. The
> question now isn't "Is binary replication perfect" but "is it *good
> enough* for some substantial portion of our users". And I think the
> answer to the latter question is, at this point, yes.
As of exactly today, my answer, for my piece of this is also "yes".
I'm not convinced that the same is true across the board. Some important
changes have happened in last few days and I see more coming.
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
|Next Message||Kevin Grittner||2010-04-28 18:21:49||explicit (void *) casts|
|Previous Message||Heikki Linnakangas||2010-04-28 18:12:56||Re: pg_start_backup and pg_stop_backup Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make CheckRequiredParameterValues() depend upon correct|