Re: remove pg_standby?

On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 6:22 PM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 3:07 AM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Per document,
>>>
>>> ------------------
>>> In fast failover, the server is brought up immediately. Any WAL files
>>> in the archive that have not yet been applied will be ignored, and all
>>> transactions in those files are lost. To trigger a fast failover,
>>> create a trigger file and write the word fast into it. pg_standby can
>>> also be configured to execute a fast failover automatically if no new
>>> WAL file appears within a defined interval.
>>> ------------------
>>
>> I thought we had that as a 9.4 feature, actually. Well wait ... that's
>> for streaming.
>
> s/9.4/9.3?
>
> That's different from one we had in 9.3. Fast failover that pg_standby
> supports is something like the feature that I was proposing at
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAHGQGwHtvyDqKZaYWYA9zyyLEcAKiF5P0KpcpuNE_tsrGTFtQw@mail.gmail.com
> that is, the feature which allows us to give up replaying remaining
> WAL data for some reasons at the standby promotion. OTOH, fast
> failover that was supported in 9.3 enables us to skip an end-of-recovery
> checkpoint at the promotion and reduce the failover time.

Calling those things by the same name is very confusing. The
data-losing feature ought to be called "immediate failover" or
something else more dangerous-sounding than "fast".

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company