Re: Time-Delayed Standbys

On 2013-12-13 11:56:47 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 12 December 2013 21:58, Fabrízio de Royes Mello
> <fabriziomello@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Reviewing the committed patch I noted that the "CheckForStandbyTrigger()"
> > after the delay was removed.
> >
> > If we promote the standby during the delay and don't check the trigger
> > immediately after the delay, then we will replay undesired WALs records.
> >
> > The attached patch add this check.
>
> I removed it because it was after the pause. I'll replace it, but
> before the pause.

Doesn't after the pause make more sense? If somebody promoted while we
were waiting, we want to recognize that before rolling forward? The wait
can take a long while after all?

Greetings,

Andres Freund

-- Andres Freund                       http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services