| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Replication & recovery_min_apply_delay |
| Date: | 2019-11-28 04:11:03 |
| Message-ID: | 20191128041103.GS237562@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 06:48:01PM +0300, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
> Attached pleased find rebased version of the patch with
> "wal_receiver_start_condition" GUC added (preserving by default original
> behavior).
Konstantin, please be careful with the patch entry in the CF app.
This was marked as waiting on author, but that does not reflect the
reality as you have sent a new patch, so I have moved the patch to
next CF instead, with "Needs review" as status.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-11-28 04:14:14 | Re: SQL:2011 PERIODS vs Postgres Ranges? |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-11-28 04:05:33 | Re: To Suggest a "DROP INCREMENTAL MATERIALIZED VIEW" in psql, but the syntax error when you run. |