On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 8:23 PM, Joshua D. Drake <j...@commandprompt.com> wrote: >> It's not as insane as introducing an archiving gap, PANICing and >> crashing, or running this hunk o junk I wrote >> http://github.com/fdr/ratchet >> > > Well certainly we shouldn't PANIC and crash but that is a simple fix. You > have a backup write location and start logging really loudly that you are > using it.
If I told you there were some of us who would prefer to attenuate the rate that things get written rather than cancel or delay archiving for a long period of time, would that explain the framing of the problem? Or, is it that you understand that's what I want, but find the notion of such a operation hard to relate to? Or, am I misunderstanding your confusion? Or, none of the above? -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
