| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(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>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(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 |
| Date: | 2010-04-29 19:33:50 |
| Message-ID: | 17861.1272569630@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Yeah. ISTM the real bottom line here is that we have only a weak grasp
>> on how these features will end up being used; or for that matter what
>> the common error scenarios will be. I think that for the time being
>> we should err on the side of being permissive. We can tighten things
>> up and add more nanny-ism in the warnings later on, when we have
>> more field experience.
> Ok, here's a proposed patch. Per discussion, it relaxes the checks in
> pg_start/stop_backup() so that they can be used as long as wal_level >=
> 'archive', even if archiving is disabled.
This patch seems reasonably noncontroversial (except possibly for
message wording, which we can fine-tune later anyway). Please apply.
9.0beta1 is going to get wrapped in only a few hours.
BTW, the documentation for these functions might need a bit of adjustment.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-04-29 20:12:18 | Hot Standby tuning for btree_xlog_vacuum() |
| Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2010-04-29 18:47:41 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make CheckRequiredParameterValues() depend upon correct |