Re: Requiring recovery.signal or standby.signal when recovering with a backup_label

From: Bowen Shi <zxwsbg12138(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Subject: Re: Requiring recovery.signal or standby.signal when recovering with a backup_label
Date: 2023-10-16 06:21:07
Message-ID: 169743726774.94390.15300025617328185211.pgcf@coridan.postgresql.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: tested, passed
Implements feature: tested, passed
Spec compliant: tested, passed
Documentation: tested, passed

It looks good to me.

I have reviewed the code and tested the patch with basic check-world test an pgbench test (metioned in https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/ZQtzcH2lvo8leXEr%40paquier.xyz#cc5ed83e0edc0b9a1c1305f08ff7a335)

Another reviewer has also approved it, so I change the status to RFC.

The new status of this patch is: Ready for Committer

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Konstantin Knizhnik 2023-10-16 06:32:21 Re: Can concurrent create index concurrently block each other?
Previous Message Noah Misch 2023-10-16 06:05:10 Re: Add support for AT LOCAL