Re: Proposal for changes to recovery.conf API
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Proposal for changes to recovery.conf API |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CANP8+jKF7nWypEzjcG7Ujrxgjzfjhte2P0CaVuK6q8PZkeL1Ww@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Proposal for changes to recovery.conf API (Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 6 September 2016 at 08:06, Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > At 2016-09-06 14:40:54 +0900, michael.paquier@gmail.com wrote: >> >> my best advice here is to make all those recovery_target_* parameters >> PGC_POSTMASTER so as they are loaded only once when the server starts, >> and then we define the recovery target type used in the startup >> process instead of trying to do so at GUC level. > > I understand your approach in light of the GUC code, but I see things a > bit differently—the complexity comes largely from the specific handling > of recovery_target. I'll try to come up with a way to do it better. If > not, we have your suggestion to fall back on. As I said upthread... "We definitely want most of them set at RELOAD, especially recovery targets." So PGC_POSTMASTER is not the objective. How then to proceed? I guess we could keep the old parameters and make them PGC_POSTMASTER, but also provide a new parameter called recovery_target that simplifies the API and is PGC_SIGHUP. That way we resolve the annoyance of handling the current ones but keep compatibility for those who can't move on, just yet. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: