| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Sergei Kornilov <sk(at)zsrv(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: could recovery_target_timeline=latest be the default in standby mode? |
| Date: | 2019-01-15 03:42:10 |
| Message-ID: | 20190115034210.GD1433@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 10:17:32AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> I'm not sure what the coverage is in detail in this area. It seems we
> already have tests for not-specific-recovery-target, maybe not in this
> file, but most of the other tests rely on that, no?
[... Checking ...]
There are no tests on HEAD using directly recovery_target_timeline in
any .pl or .pm file, which is definitely not a good idea.
004_timeline_switch.pl is actually designed for checking the latest
timeline, which is fine. 002_archiving.pl somewhat tests for the
current timeline, still it is not really designed for this purpose.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Edmund Horner | 2019-01-15 03:47:09 | Re: Tid scan improvements |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-01-15 03:12:39 | Re: Safely calling index_getprocinfo() while holding an nbtree exclusive buffer lock |