Re: Request for vote to move forward with recovery.conf overhaul

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Phil Sorber <phil(at)omniti(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Request for vote to move forward with recovery.conf overhaul
Date: 2013-01-22 00:27:47
Message-ID: CA+TgmoY+EAK6TaLXPSLxf1SBKFMeaybBso_q6M_PBUsRPh17tg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 6:23 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Yes, that is one of the most important patches in the list, and I could put
> some effort in it for either review or coding.

I think it would be great if you could elaborate on your reasons for
feeling that this patch is particularly important.

--
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 Robert Haas 2013-01-22 00:31:12 Re: CF3+4 (was Re: Parallel query execution)
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2013-01-22 00:25:05 Re: Re: Slave enters in recovery and promotes when WAL stream with master is cut + delay master/slave