On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 05:28:46PM +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > Removing pg_standby has been proposed a couple of times in the past. See > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20170913064824.rqflkadxwpboa...@alap3.anarazel.de > for the latest attempt. > > Masao-san, back in 2014 you mentioned "fast failover" as a feature that was > missing from the built-in standby mode > (https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAHGQGwEE_8vvpQk0ex6Qa_aXt-OSJ7OdZjX4uM_FtqKfxq5SbQ%40mail.gmail.com). > I think that's been implemented since, with the recovery_target settings. > Would you agree? > > I'm pretty sure we can remove pg_standby by now. But if there's something > crucial missing from the built-in facilities, we need to talk about > implementing them.
Reading the thread you are mentioning, it seems to me that the statu-quo is the same, but I find rather scary that this tool is used in exactly zero tests. Echoing with Robert, I think that pg_archivecleanup is still useful in many cases, so that's not something we should remove. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
