From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf |
Date: | 2011-10-10 21:37:32 |
Message-ID: | CA+U5nMJU-KTGU=5mRbFWz8qQEUeiUZ7M3KxuPs4seQHEA6Kx6g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 6:52 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
>> Tatsuo/Josh/Robert also discussed how recovery.conf can be used to
>> provide parameters solely for recovery. That is difficult to do
>> without causing all downstream tools to make major changes in the ways
>> they supply parameters.
>
> Actually, this case is easily solved by an "include recovery.conf"
> parameter. So it's a non-issue.
That is what I've suggested and yes, doing that is straightforward.
If you mean "do that in a program" if we had a problem with adding
parameters, we also have a problem adding an include.
We should avoid breaking programs which we have no reason to break.
Stability is good, change without purpose is not.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dan Ports | 2011-10-10 21:55:10 | Re: Overhead cost of Serializable Snapshot Isolation |
Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2011-10-10 21:32:27 | Re: SET variable - Permission issues |