On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 27 March 2013 12:59, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Also, based on Greg's spec (that Robert and I basically agreed on), if >> recovery.conf is found at the root of data folder an error is returned to >> user, recommending him to migrate correctly by referring to dedicated >> documentation. > > I'm following what was agreed on 24 December.
I assume that you are referring to this message: http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA+U5nMK8n=sq-xpvbvtics3nbvobjuvm5xbr+faeqn-rjjg...@mail.gmail.com I don't see a followup from anyone clearly agreeing that this was a useful thing to do. There is a lot of support for turning recovery.conf parameters into GUCs. But I don't remember anyone supporting this idea, and like Heikki and Michael, I don't understand how it moves the ball forward. Considering there's been no discussion of this particular change in three months, and not a whole lot back then, I think it would have been polite to post the patch and ask for comments before committing it. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
