Re: New trigger option of pg_standby

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Guillaume Smet <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: New trigger option of pg_standby
Date: 2009-05-13 18:22:42
Message-ID: 1242238962.3772.23.camel@jd-laptop.pragmaticzealot.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 14:14 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:

> pg_standby is useful and needs to be correct. And its existence as a
> standard module is one of the things that has made me feel confident
> about recommending people to use the PITR stuff. I'll be very annoyed if
> it were to get pulled.

Although I am not advocating one position or another there are benefits
to removing it. It would be nice to continue to enhance pg_standby
without the limitations of the core release schedule.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

--
PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake(at)jabber(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Consulting, Development, Support, Training
503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2009-05-13 18:26:15 Re: New trigger option of pg_standby
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2009-05-13 18:14:56 Re: New trigger option of pg_standby