Where are we on this?
---
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 01:52:35AM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 3:01 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
archive_command and restore_command describe how to ship
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Where are we on this?
It didn't make it into 9.2, and the patch hasn't been resubmitted for
9.3. It's still not really 100% clear to me what problem it lets us
solve that we can't solve otherwise. Maybe that is just a
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 1:20 AM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
Does this patch have any user-visible effect? I thought it would make
pg_last_xact_replay_timestamp() advance, but it does not seem to. I
looked
On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 1:20 AM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
Does this patch have any user-visible effect? I thought it would make
pg_last_xact_replay_timestamp() advance, but it does not seem to. I
looked through the source a bit, and as best I can tell this only sets
some
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 3:01 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
archive_command and restore_command describe how to ship WAL files
to/from an archive.
When there is nothing to ship, we delay sending WAL files.
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 3:01 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
archive_command and restore_command describe how to ship WAL files
to/from an archive.
When there is nothing to ship, we delay sending WAL files. When no WAL
files, the standby has no information at all.
To provide
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Dec 12, you said It also strikes me that anything
that is based on augmenting the walsender/walreceiver protocol leaves
anyone who is using WAL shipping out in the cold. I'm not clear from
the comments you or Simon
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
To provide some form of keepalive on quiet systems the
archive_keepalive_command provides a generic hook to implement
keepalives. This is implemented as a separate command to avoid storing
keepalive messages in the
On 12/19/2011 08:17 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
If you want keepalives, why use log shipping rather than SR? Implementing a
really-high-latency method of passing protocol messages through the
archive seems like a complex solution to a non-problem
The problem being addressed is how can people using
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
To provide some form of keepalive on quiet systems the
archive_keepalive_command provides a generic hook to implement
keepalives. This is
10 matches
Mail list logo
