On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 08:29 -0700, David Fetter wrote: > On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 03:43:54PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote: > > On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 07:31 -0700, David Fetter wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 12:49:44PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 11:29 +0100, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > > > > > This could be implemented by a "pass-through" restore_command, > > > > > that calls pg_standby, and does the custom action when > > > > > pg_standby returns successfully. > > > > > > > > Yes, that's the preferred route for most cases. > > > > > > > > pg_standby was designed to be customisable, so if it works for > > > > Chris, thats OK. > > > > > > > > After some mulling on this, I'm not sure we need to include this > > > > in pg_standby however. If we did we'd end up having before/after > > > > commands and retry options etc. > > > > > > Would those be good things to have as a whole package? > > > > I think the answer is we already do. It's called bash. > > Just a stray thought...bash doesn't run very well on common Windows > installations.
True, but you can run anything you choose... -- Simon Riggs 2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com -- Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list (pgsql-patches@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-patches
