On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 01:56:27PM -0800, Jeff Janes wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 04:26:48PM -0800, Jeff Janes wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > We don't assume people are reading docs from very old versions.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Even if that is the version they are using? It is, after all, still
>> >> under maintenance,
>> >
>> > There are three options for doc patches:
>> >
>> > 1. patch only git head, meaning the next major release
>> > 2. do #1, plus the most recent major released version, e.g. 9.2.X
>> > 3. #1, #2, and all major supported released versions
>> >
>> > In general, #1 is normally for wording clarifications, #2 is for usage
>> > clarifications, and #3 is to correct mistakes. Not sure I follow that
>> > 100%, but that is what I normally do.
>> >
>> > Is that process good? Did I not follow it?
>>
>> It was removed from 9.0 because it was considered to be unreliable. I
>> think that unreliable advice about taking backups is a mistake, so it
>> should have followed path #3. I guess it is also clarification, but a
>> pretty major one.
>
> I checked just now and the unreliable advice does not appear in 8.4, so
> it possible that in 2010 I checked and found it only applied back to
> 9.0, or I might only have checked 9.0.
The docs were re-arranged, so it is present but in a different place.
Sorry, I should have included the URL in the first place (24.4.5) :
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/static/warm-standby.html
Cheers,
Jeff