On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 25 March 2013 04:08, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
Feedback is warmly welcome.
I'll look at this in the coming week.
Thanks.
--
Michael
On 25 March 2013 04:08, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
Feedback is warmly welcome.
I'll look at this in the coming week.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training Services
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.comwrote:
Thanks for taking time in typing a complete summary of the situation. That
really helps.
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 1/23/13 6:36 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
The
Michael Paquier escribió:
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.comwrote:
Looks good to me too.
Based on the patch I already sent before, there are a couple of things
missing:
- There are no pg_ctl standby/recover commands implemented yet (no that
On 3/8/13 10:34 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
This patch is still in the current commit fest. Any objections in
marking it as returned with feedback and put it in the next commit fest?
There are currently 20 Needs Review and 14 Waiting on Author things
left in the queue, so it's not quite that
On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
There are currently 20 Needs Review and 14 Waiting on Author things
left in the queue, so it's not quite that there's no time left. There
really isn't very much left to do on this. The rough consensus idea from
before
On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 9:25 PM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
-Allow a pg_ctl standby and pg_ctl recover command that work similarly
to promote. This should slim down the work needed for the first
replication setup people do.
-Make it obvious when people try to use recovery.conf that
Thanks for taking time in typing a complete summary of the situation. That
really helps.
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 1/23/13 6:36 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
The only problem I see is if the same parameter is defined in
recovery.conf and
On 1/23/13 6:36 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
The only problem I see is if the same parameter is defined in recovery.conf and
postgresql.conf, is the priority given to recovery.conf?
This sort of thing is what dragged down the past work on this. I don't
really agree with the idea this thread
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 1:01 AM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
So... what happens when recovery ends? Do the settings loaded from
recovery.conf get reverted, or what?
With current patch the settings are kept if set in postgresql.conf and
discarded if they are loaded as GUC
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 6:36 AM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2013/01/23, at 18:12, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 23 January 2013 04:49, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
- recovery.conf is removed (no backward compatibility in this version
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 9:49 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 7:14 AM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 6:36 AM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2013/01/23, at 18:12, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 9:49 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 7:14 AM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 6:36 AM, Michael Paquier
On 23 January 2013 04:49, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
- recovery.conf is removed (no backward compatibility in this version of the
patch)
If you want to pursue that, you know where it leads. No, rebasing a
rejected patch doesn't help, its just relighting a fire that
On 2013/01/23, at 18:12, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 23 January 2013 04:49, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
- recovery.conf is removed (no backward compatibility in this version of the
patch)
If you want to pursue that, you know where it leads. No,
Le mardi 22 janvier 2013 01:54:50, Michael Paquier a écrit :
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 9:27 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 6:23 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, that is one of the most important patches in the list, and I could
On 21 January 2013 23:23, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
It is an 17-month-old-patch, so of course it does not apply on master.
However before taking any actions, I would like to know the following:
- Simon, are you planning to update this patch?
It's on my list, but not at
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.comwrote:
I found that support for pg_basebackup -R was in the old patch, and I
haven't done anything for that yet.
Sorry, I meant that pg_basebackup -R support was NOT in the old patch, and
I haven't done anything about
- if you want to trigger a recovery at promotion or have the recovery
parameters read on slave at startup, you need to create a file called
recovery.trigger in PGDATA. (something like touch recovery.conf is
enough). Once recovery is done, recovery.trigger is changed to
recovery.done.
So,
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
There has been discussion in the past of removing or significantly
changing the way streaming replication/point-in-time-recovery (PITR) is
setup in Postgres. Currently the file recovery.conf is used, but that
was designed
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 1:11 AM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
There has been discussion in the past of removing or significantly
changing the way streaming replication/point-in-time-recovery (PITR) is
setup in
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 6:23 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, that is one of the most important patches in the list, and I could put
some effort in it for either review or coding.
I think it would be great if you could elaborate on your reasons for
feeling that this
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 9:27 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 6:23 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, that is one of the most important patches in the list, and I could
put
some effort in it for either review or coding.
I think
There has been discussion in the past of removing or significantly
changing the way streaming replication/point-in-time-recovery (PITR) is
setup in Postgres. Currently the file recovery.conf is used, but that
was designed for PITR and does not serve streaming replication well.
This all should
On 21 December 2012 19:46, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
There has been discussion in the past of removing or significantly
changing the way streaming replication/point-in-time-recovery (PITR) is
setup in Postgres. Currently the file recovery.conf is used, but that
was designed for
25 matches
Mail list logo
