Re: pg_ctl failover Re: Latches, signals, and waiting

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_ctl failover Re: Latches, signals, and waiting
Date: 2011-02-16 02:30:55
Message-ID: AANLkTimjG1Qp_0SwNRA03zE3YTjbspRH4DmGy7BjcvJA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 10:18 PM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Thanks for the review!
>
> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 11:25 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>> I see that the docs part of the patch removes the mentioning of
>> reporting servers - is that intentional, or a mistake? Seems that
>> usecase still remains, no?
>
> It was intentional, but I agree with you. I re-added the mention to
> the reporting servers.
>
> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 11:30 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>> Also, the patch no longer applies, since it conflicts with
>> faa0550572583f51dba25611ab0f1d1c31de559b.
>>
>> Since you (Fujii-san) wrote both of them, feel like rebasing it
>> properly for current master?
>
> Yeah, I rebased the patch to the current git master and attached it.

Committed with minor tweaks to comments and documentation.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fujii Masao 2011-02-16 02:34:46 Re: Replication server timeout patch
Previous Message Fujii Masao 2011-02-16 02:25:30 Re: XMin Hot Standby Feedback patch