Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Synchronous replication & Hot standby patches

From: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, "K, Niranjan (NSN - IN/Bangalore)" <niranjan(dot)k(at)nsn(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Synchronous replication & Hot standby patches
Date: 2009-02-24 20:21:18
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 5:08 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> So far, everything has been couched in terms of remove the way it is now
> and put in its place something "better". Heikki and Josh have said that
> or similar, as has Robert Haas on another thread, and Fujii-san
> specifically said "get rid of" the existing functionality. I am
> completely against the removal of an existing capability that is
> critically important to many users.

Though my description may be confusing, I don't mean to remove
any existing features unless necessary. I just said get rid of
file-based log shipping part only from my patch.

> If we can add new functionality that is a nice-to-have for a large
> number of people without removing a feature that is critical to many
> users, bring it on. If we can't do that, then I would oppose.

Yes, I also think so.


Fujii Masao
NTT Open Source Software Center

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2009-02-24 20:25:28
Subject: Re: Hot standby, recovery procs
Previous:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2009-02-24 20:08:02
Subject: Re: Synchronous replication & Hot standby patches

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group