Re: Summary and Plan for Hot Standby
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Summary and Plan for Hot Standby |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 24573.1258323425@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Summary and Plan for Hot Standby (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Summary and Plan for Hot Standby
Re: Summary and Plan for Hot Standby Re: Summary and Plan for Hot Standby |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes: > So I'm in favor of committing part of the HS code even if there are > known failure conditions, as long as those conditions are well-defined. If we're thinking of committing something that is known broken, I would want to have a clearly defined and trust-inspiring escape strategy. "We can always revert the patch later" inspires absolutely zero confidence here, because in a patch this large there are always going to be overlaps with other later patches. If it gets to be February and HS is still unshippable, reverting is going to be a tricky and risky affair. I agree with Heikki that it would be better not to commit as long as any clear showstoppers remain unresolved. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: