On 7/10/13 9:39 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 10.07.2013 02:54, Josh Berkus wrote:
One bit of complexity I'd like to see go away is that we have two
trigger files: one to put a server into replication, and one to promote
it. The promotion trigger file is a legacy of warm standby, I believe.
On 10.07.2013 02:54, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 07/08/2013 11:43 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
1. MOVE SETTINGS
All settings move into the postgresql.conf.
Comment: AFAIK, all agree this.
Good to go then.
+1.
2. RELOCATE RECOVERY PARAMETER FILE(s)
As of 9.2, relocating the postgresql.conf means there
On 07/08/2013 11:43 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> This needs to be broken down rather than just say "I like Greg's
> proposal", or I have written a patch. Writing the patch is not the/an
> issue.
>
> Greg's points were these (I have numbered them and named/characterised them)
Thanks for the nice summa
On 5 July 2013 19:49, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Robert, Simon, All,
>
> On 04/01/2013 04:51 AM, Robert Haas wrote:> On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at
> 11:48 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>> a) recovery parameters are made into GUCs (for which we have a patch
>>> from Fujii)
>>> b) all processes automatically read
On 2013/07/09, at 4:09, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 07/05/2013 10:09 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Yeah, it would be good to revive this thread now, which is the
>> beginning of the development cycle. As of now, just to recall
>> everybody, an agreement on this patch still needs to be found... Simon
On 07/05/2013 10:09 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Yeah, it would be good to revive this thread now, which is the
> beginning of the development cycle. As of now, just to recall
> everybody, an agreement on this patch still needs to be found... Simon
> is concerned with backward compatibility. Greg p
On Sat, Jul 6, 2013 at 3:49 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Robert, Simon, All,
>
> On 04/01/2013 04:51 AM, Robert Haas wrote:> On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at
> 11:48 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>> a) recovery parameters are made into GUCs (for which we have a patch
>>> from Fujii)
>>> b) all processes automatic
Robert, Simon, All,
On 04/01/2013 04:51 AM, Robert Haas wrote:> On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at
11:48 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> a) recovery parameters are made into GUCs (for which we have a patch
>> from Fujii)
>> b) all processes automatically read recovery.conf as the last step in
>> reading configu
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> What we want to do is make recovery parameters into GUCs, allowing
> them to be reset by SIGHUP and also to allow all users to see the
> parameters in use, from any session.
>
> The existing mechanism for recovery is that
> 1. we put parameter
Josh Berkus writes:
> The desire to move recovery.conf/trigger to a different directory is
> definitely wanted by our Debian contingent. Right now, the fact that
> Debian has all .confs in /etc/, but that it doesn't work to relocate
> recovery.conf, is a constant source of irritation.
It seems l
Simon, All,
The new approach seems fine to me; I haven't looked at the code. If Tom
doesn't feel like it's overly complicated, then this seems like a good
compromise.
The desire to move recovery.conf/trigger to a different directory is
definitely wanted by our Debian contingent. Right now, the
On 29 March 2013 01:17, Michael Paquier wrote:
> I highly recommend that
> you use one of the latest updated version I sent. Fujii's version had some
> bugs, one of them being that as standbyModeRequested can be set to true if
> specified in postgresql.conf, a portion of the code using in xlog.c
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 01:56:50PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 29 March 2013 13:24, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 9:59 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> >>
> >> On 29 March 2013 01:17, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >> > On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 12:48 AM, Simon Riggs
> >> > wrote:
> >>
On 29 March 2013 13:24, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 9:59 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>
>> On 29 March 2013 01:17, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> > On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 12:48 AM, Simon Riggs
>> > wrote:
>> Early discussions had difficulties because of the lack of config
>> directo
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 9:59 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 29 March 2013 01:17, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 12:48 AM, Simon Riggs
> wrote:
> Early discussions had difficulties because of the lack of config
> directories, include_if_exists and this patch. We now have the
> t
On 29 March 2013 01:17, Michael Paquier wrote:
> The main argument on which this proposal is based on is to keep
> backward-compatibility.
The main objective is to get recovery parameters as GUCs, as I said
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 12:48 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> What we want to do is mak
Hi,
The main argument on which this proposal is based on is to keep
backward-compatibility.
This has been discussed before many times and the position of each people
is well-known,
so I am not going back to that...
So, based on *only* what I see in this thread...
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 12:48 AM
17 matches
Mail list logo
