Re: Turning recovery.conf into GUCs

On 10/18/2013 01:35 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2013-10-18 13:16:52 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> I thought changeset extraction was the only thing going into core?  What
>> else do we need?
> 
> Well, I personally want more in core mid/long term, but anyway.

I've lost track of the plan, then.

Hmmm ... we need replication of DDL commands, no?

> Without released, proven and stable logical in-core replication
> technology using this, I don't see why repmgr or something related would
> need/want to change?

Repmgr is designed to manage binary replication, not perform it.

What will likely change first is Slony and Bucardo, who have a strong
interest in dumping triggers and queues.  A contrib module which did the
simplest implementation -- that is, whole-database M-S replication --
would also be a good idea, especially since it would provide an example
of how to build your own.

But I'd be wary of going beyond that in core, because you very quickly
get into the territory of trying to satisfy multiple exclusive
use-cases.  Let's focus on providing a really good API which enables
people to build their own tools.

-- 
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com