Re: standbycheck was:(Re: [HACKERS] testing hot standby

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: standbycheck was:(Re: [HACKERS] testing hot standby
Date: 2010-05-01 15:16:47
Message-ID: 1272727007.4161.23413.camel@ebony
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, 2010-05-01 at 09:05 -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote:

> maybe we should be using the tables that exists in the regression
> database or adding hs_setup_primary in installcheck to prepare the
> regression database to run standbycheck in the standby server

That's part of the procedure already.

We need something better for the future, though not sure if there's any
small tweaks worth making for 9.0 right now. Let's start making wider
plans for next release.

--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-05-01 15:42:14 Re: pg_migrator to /contrib in a later 9.0 beta
Previous Message Jaime Casanova 2010-05-01 14:05:53 Re: standbycheck was:(Re: [HACKERS] testing hot standby