| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Let's drop two obsolete features which are bear-traps for novices |
| Date: | 2014-11-01 19:11:40 |
| Message-ID: | 8813.1414869100@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> One argument in that direction imo is HS. We certainly would just
> generally ignore unlogged indexes for querying while InRecovery, right?
> Because otherwise HS would become pretty useless. And I think it'd be
> pretty wierd if things worked on HS and not on the primary (or the HS
> after promotion).
I don't see how HS has anything to do with this discussion. We would
certainly have the index marked as unlogged in the catalogs, and we
would therefore not use it while InRecovery. Once you promote a
slave to live, it would be in the same state as a post-crash-recovery
master.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2014-11-01 19:17:14 | Re: Let's drop two obsolete features which are bear-traps for novices |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-11-01 19:08:00 | Re: Let's drop two obsolete features which are bear-traps for novices |