| From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: remove pg_standby? |
| Date: | 2014-11-10 17:16:18 |
| Message-ID: | CAHGQGwEwsTMB24g1usLHe1q3dPWX97xkuxWM0grx9uW-EGD0=w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 6:36 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> While we're talking about removing old things, is there any use left for
> pg_standby?
-1 for removing it. There is still the case where I'd like to use log-shipping
rather than replication. For example, it's the case where I need to
compress WAL files before streaming them via very thin network.
We can set up log-shipping using standby_mode and without using
pg_standby, but it keeps emitting the failure of restore_command while
while there is no WAL activity, and which is bothersome. So I still need
pg_standby for log-shipping.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2014-11-10 17:19:52 | Re: remove pg_standby? |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2014-11-10 17:10:49 | Re: pg_background (and more parallelism infrastructure patches) |