Re: [proposal] recovery_target "latest"

On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 6:33 PM Grigory Smolkin <g(dot)smolkin(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
>
>
> On 11/6/19 10:39 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > This seems to also be related to this discussion:
> > <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/993736dd3f1713ec1f63fc3b653839f5(at)lako(dot)no>
>
> Yes, in a way. Strengthening current lax recovery behavior is a very
> good idea.
>
> >
> > I like this idea.
> >
> > I don't like the name "latest". What does that mean? Other
> > documentation talks about the "end of the archive". What does that
> > mean? It means until restore_command errors. Let's think of a name
> > that reflects that better. Maybe "all_archive" or something like that.
>
> As with "immediate", "latest" reflects the latest possible state this
> PostgreSQL instance can achieve when using PITR. I think it is simple
> and easy to understand for an end user, which sees PITR as a way to go
> from one state to another. In my experience, at least, which is, of
> course, subjective.
>
> But if we want an argument name to be technically accurate, then, I
> think, something like "end-of-available-WAL"/"all-WAL", "end-of-WAL" is
> a way to go.

What happens if this parameter is set to latest in the standby mode?
Or the combination of those settings should be prohibited?

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao