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

Re: pitr replica dies on startup

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jeff Frost <jeff(at)frostconsultingllc(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: pitr replica dies on startup
Date: 2007-09-01 01:56:50
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-admin
Jeff Frost <jeff(at)frostconsultingllc(dot)com> writes:
> That all seems reasonable enough.  Is it in the docs somewhere?  I
> didn't find anything like this mentioned.  If not, could we get it
> added as a note?

Yeah, it hadn't occurred to anyone to specify this, because we just
thought of recovery_command as fetching from a static archive.
We clearly need to document the expected semantics better.

I'm wondering whether we should discourage people from putting
side-effects into the recovery_command, period.  You already found out
that recovery can ask for the same file more than once, but what if it
never asks for a particular file at all?  I'm not sure that can happen,
just playing devil's advocate.

Simon, did you see this thread?  What do you think?

			regards, tom lane

In response to


pgsql-admin by date

Next:From: Jeff FrostDate: 2007-09-01 02:09:02
Subject: Re: pitr replica dies on startup
Previous:From: Jeff FrostDate: 2007-09-01 01:49:08
Subject: Re: pitr replica dies on startup

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