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

Re: Streaming replication, loose ends

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Streaming replication, loose ends
Date: 2010-01-15 17:03:18
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'm actually fairly uncomfortable with the notion that something buried
>> deep within the src/backend tree is going to reach over and cause libpq
>> to get built.  Maybe the real answer is that you put walreceiver in the
>> wrong place, and it ought to be under src/bin/.

> That feels even more wrong to me. Walreceiver is a postmaster
> subprocess, tightly integrated with the rest of the backend.

[ shrug... ]  pg_dump, to take one example, is considerably more
"tightly integrated" with the backend than walreceiver is.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2010-01-15 17:07:52
Subject: Re: Streaming replication, loose ends
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-01-15 17:00:32
Subject: Re: Streaming replication, loose ends

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group