| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: What's with all the fflush(stderr) calls in pg_standby.c? |
| Date: | 2017-09-25 04:09:19 |
| Message-ID: | 20170925040919.w3vxaj4s7uoj7pva@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017-09-25 10:01:35 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 9:45 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > On a related note, the idea of removing pg_standby altogether has been
> > proposed a few times.
Including recently by me http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/20170913064824.rqflkadxwpboabgw%40alap3.anarazel.de
> > Apparently there are a few things that it still
> > does better than standby_mode, but nobody seems in a hurry to do
> > anything about that. Still, I'd be against spending a lot of time
> > trying to improve a tool that has mostly outlived its usefulness - we
> > ought to be trying to enhance the in-core facilities instead.
>
> +1.
It's also pretty crummy code that has no test coverage. I'd just remove
it.
- Andres
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2017-09-25 04:24:43 | Patch to address concerns about ICU collcollate stability in v10 (Was: CREATE COLLATION does not sanitize ICU's BCP 47 language tags. Should it?) |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-09-25 03:10:50 | Re: Shaky coding for vacuuming partitioned relations |