Re: DeArchiver process

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 12:42 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Any standby can now become a sender node, so the meaning in that case
> would be the same. That takes a little time to get your head around,
> and I'm not used to it myself yet.

I think a new parameter will be more clear, even if in practice the
difference is fairly thin.

>>> Which do we prefer "DeArchiver", "Restore process", or "WALFileReceiver".
>>
>> My personal preference would be restore process, since we already use
>> the name restore_command.
>
> Restore process, with file called restore.c in src/backend/postmaster
> (or src/backend/replication?)

Yeah, that works.  I'd go for postmaster over replication, for parallelism.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company