Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 16:31 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I thought the latest conclusion was that changing the behavior of
>> pg_standby itself wouldn't address the problem anyway, and that what we
>> need is just a docs patch recommending that people use safe copying
>> methods in their scripts that copy to the archive area?

> Plus the rest of this patch, which is really very simple.

Why?  AFAICT the patch is just a kluge that adds user-visible complexity
without providing a solution that's actually sure to work.

                        regards, tom lane

Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list (
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to