Re: Proposal for changes to recovery.conf API

On 09/28/2016 10:13 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 10:11 AM, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> wrote:
>> On 9/6/16 8:07 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 9:45 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Related cleanup
>>>> * Promotion signal file is now called "promote.trigger" rather than
>>>> just "promote"
>>>> * Remove user configurable "trigger_file" mechanism - use
>>>> "promote.trigger" for all cases
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm in favor of this. I don't think that it's very hard for authors
>>> of backup tools to adapt to this new world, and I don't see that
>>> allowing configurability here does anything other than create more
>>> cases to worry about.
>>
>> +1 from a backup tool author.
>
> It's time to wrap up this CommitFest, and this thread doesn't seem to
> contain anything that looks like a committable patch. So, I'm marking
> this "Returned with Feedback". I hope that the fact that there's been
> no discussion for the last three weeks doesn't mean this effort is
> dead; I would like very much to see it move forward.

Has this gone anywhere? Given that we're in "break all the things" mode
for PostgreSQL 10, it would be the ideal time to consolidate
recovery.conf with pg.conf.

--
--
Josh Berkus
Red Hat OSAS
(any opinions are my own)