Re: Summary and Plan for Hot Standby

On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 11:07 AM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> wrote:
> Tom Lane  wrote:
>
>> I agree with Heikki that it would be better not to commit as long as
>> any clear showstoppers remain unresolved.
>
> I agree that it would be better not to commit as long as any of the
> following are true:
>
> (1)  There are any known issues which would break things for clusters
>     *not using* hot standby.
>
> (2)  There isn't an easy way for to disable configuration of hot
>     standby.
>
> (3)  There is significant doubt that the vast majority of the patch
>     will be useful in the eventually-enabled final solution.
>
> If none of these are true, I'm not sure what the down side of a commit
> is.

Well, I think you wouldn't want to commit something that enabled Hot
Standby but caused Hot Standby queries to give wrong answers, or
didn't even allow some/all queries to be executed.  That's fairly
pointless, and might mislead users into thinking we had a feature when
we really didn't.

...Robert