On 24 April 2013 09:10, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakan...@vmware.com> wrote: > Regarding the change in pg_ctl: > >> /* >> - * Use two different kinds of promotion file so we can understand >> - * the difference between smart and fast promotion. >> + * For 9.3 onwards, use fast promotion as the default option. >> + * Promotion with a full checkpoint is still possible by writing >> + * a file called "promote", e.g. >> + * snprintf(promote_file, MAXPGPATH, "%s/promote", pg_data); >> */ >> - if (shutdown_mode >= FAST_MODE) >> - snprintf(promote_file, MAXPGPATH, "%s/fast_promote", >> pg_data); >> - else >> - snprintf(promote_file, MAXPGPATH, "%s/promote", pg_data); >> + snprintf(promote_file, MAXPGPATH, "%s/fast_promote", pg_data); > > > Should there be a version check there? I guess we've never guaranteed a > newer pg_ctl to work with an older server version, but it seems likely that > someone would try to do that, especially with "pg_ctl promote". With the > above change, creating $DATADIR/fast_promote in a 9.2 server's data dir will > do nothing. I'd suggest that we keep the filename unchanged, "promote", and > only change the behavior in the server side, so that it performs fast > promotion. If you want to have a "slow" promote file, we can call that > "slow_promote" or "checkpoint_then_promote" or something.
pg_ctl already checks versions, so I don't see the point. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
