Re: Remaining Streaming Replication Open Items

Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 4:09 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
> <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>>> * Fix things so that any such variables inherited from the server environment are intentionally *NOT* used for making SR connections.
>>
>> Drop. Besides, we have the same problem with dblink, and I don't recall
>> anyone complaining.

> Yep, but I don't think that dblink has the same issue because it's often
> used to connect to another database on the same postgres instance, which
> seems proper method.

Yes, dblink is a poor precedent to cite because self-connections are a sane
behavior in its case.

> The problem is that walreceiver might wrongly connect
> to *its* server and get stuck because no WAL records arrive for ever.
> Since currently we don't allow the standby to accept the replication
> connection, the problem will not happen in 9.0, and ISTM we don't need
> to address it right now. So I agree to drop.

Agreed, this can be put off until we support relay replication. I think
it will be an issue then, however.

regards, tom lane