From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Shubham Khanna <khannashubham1197(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Enhance pg_createsubscriber to create required standby. |
Date: | 2025-06-18 05:13:07 |
Message-ID: | CAKFQuwa4aR4vzvbGikiLLGnh-pkPDMRCh4jSL_D72vGJJVUK=A@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jun 17, 2025 at 9:22 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> As shown in Vignesh's email [1] (point 4), there could be multiple
> additional parameters required for the first option suggested by you,
> which will make it longer. Additionally, there are some other benefits
> of having the second option (pg_createsubscriber --create-standby),
> like better cleanup of contents during failures and better progress
> reporting. Are you still against adding such an option?
>
> [1]:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALDaNm1biZBMOzFMfHYzqrAeosJSD5YRG%3D82-pp6%2BJhALsfe6w%40mail.gmail.com
>
>
None of those benefits convince me that "let's write a shell script in C
and put it under an annual feature release policy" is the way to go here.
Let's make something like this available to the community, say on the Wiki,
and make it work in PostgreSQL 18 so they can benefit from it today, and
readily use it as a basis to tweak things for their own unique
circumstances.
David J.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2025-06-18 05:13:27 | Re: [PATCH] Split varlena.c into varlena.c and bytea.c |
Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2025-06-18 05:02:21 | Re: Adding a '--clean-publisher-objects' option to 'pg_createsubscriber' utility. |