Re: [REVIEW] pg_last_xact_insert_timestamp
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [REVIEW] pg_last_xact_insert_timestamp |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+U5nMK0d2eWjoogw=GWxgMeRRAWTwRAoi1CTO85qvU-1gt4JQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [REVIEW] pg_last_xact_insert_timestamp (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [REVIEW] pg_last_xact_insert_timestamp
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: >>> It also strikes me that anything >>> that is based on augmenting the walsender/walreceiver protocol leaves >>> anyone who is using WAL shipping out in the cold. I'm not clear from >>> the comments you or Simon have made how important you think that use >>> case still is. >> >> archive_timeout > 0 works just fine at generating files even when >> quiet, or if it does not, it is a bug. >> >> So I don't understand your comments, please explain. > > If the standby has restore_command set but not primary_conninfo, then > it will never make a direct connection to the master. So anything > that's based on extending that protocol won't get used in that case. Got that, but now explain the reason for saying such people are "out in the cold". -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: