| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: s/recovery_connections/allow_standby_queries/, or something like that? |
| Date: | 2010-04-29 17:43:39 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTinLbbuJ2IO8vlwLyB3d48DEFiDgCjn5vHoRH6IY@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 1:38 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think a different name would help. The best idea I can come up with
>> on the spur of the moment is "allow_standby_queries", but I'm not sure
>> that can't be improved on. Comments?
>
> One objection to that name is that it also works during archive
> recovery, like during PITR, which is not a standby server. But that's
> probably a rare use case.
Gee, I think of it as a standby regardless of whether it's created
using archiving or SR. Do we not have a generic term that covers both
cases?
> +1 on changing it to something.
Boy, my blog post is going to have a darn short shelf life (see the
last paragraph).
http://rhaas.blogspot.com/2010/04/write-ahead-logging-in-postgresql-90.html
...Robert
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-04-29 17:49:15 | Re: s/recovery_connections/allow_standby_queries/, or something like that? |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2010-04-29 17:42:40 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make CheckRequiredParameterValues() depend upon correct |