Re: Re: BUG #13685: Archiving while idle every archive_timeout with wal_level hot_standby
От | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: BUG #13685: Archiving while idle every archive_timeout with wal_level hot_standby |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAB7nPqR+VOUvOTwk5kxb2Tn7-JXXdtq3AkTcwjEdEL_tdBXp7g@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #13685: Archiving while idle every archive_timeout with wal_level hot_standby (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: BUG #13685: Archiving while idle every
archive_timeout with wal_level hot_standby
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com> wrote: > Simple patch, applies and makes cleanly, does what it says and says what it does. > > If a transaction holding locks aborts on an otherwise idle server, perhaps it will take a very long time for a log-shippingstandby to realize this. But I have hard time believing that anyone who cares about that would be using log-shipping(rather than streaming) anyway. > > Marking it ready for committer. > > The new status of this patch is: Ready for Committer Thanks! That was deadly fast. Just wondering: shouldn't we keep the discussion around this patch on -bugs instead? Not saying you are wrong, Jeff, I am just not sure what would be the best practice regarding patches related to bugs. I would think that it is at least necessary to keep the person who reported the bug in CC to let him know the progress though. -- Michael
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: