Re: archive modules
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: archive modules |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2910705.1663193529@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: archive modules (Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: archive modules
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 04:47:23PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Yeah, the objection there is only to trying to enforce such >> interrelationships in GUC hooks. In this case it seems to me that >> we could easily check and complain at the point where we're about >> to use the GUC values. > I think the cleanest way to do something like that would be to load a > check_configured_cb that produces a WARNING. IIRC failing in > LoadArchiveLibrary() would just cause the archiver process to restart over > and over. HandlePgArchInterrupts() might need some work as well. Hm. Maybe consistency-check these settings in the postmaster, sometime after we've absorbed all GUC settings but before we launch any children? That could provide a saner implementation for the recovery_target_* variables too. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: