Re: SSI and Hot Standby

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: SSI and Hot Standby
Date: 2011-01-20 22:09:16
Message-ID: 4D38B28C.10701@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Kevin,

> So, based on a more complete description of the issues, any more
> opinions on whether to generate the error, as suggested by Heikki?

If it's a choice between generating an error and letting users see
inconsistent data, I'll take the former.

> Does anyone think this justifies the compatibility GUC as suggested
> by Jeff?

I think it might, yes. Since someone could simply turn on the backwards
compatibility flag for 9.1 and turn it off for 9.2, rather than trying
to mess with transaction states which might be set in application code.

Unfortunately, people have not responded to our survey :-(
http://www.postgresql.org/community/survey.77

--
-- Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://www.pgexperts.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-01-20 22:26:13 Re: Orphaned statements issue
Previous Message Bosco Rama 2011-01-20 22:07:01 Re: Large object corruption during 'piped' pg_restore