Re: [REVIEW] pg_last_xact_insert_timestamp

On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> It also strikes me that anything
>> that is based on augmenting the walsender/walreceiver protocol leaves
>> anyone who is using WAL shipping out in the cold.  I'm not clear from
>> the comments you or Simon have made how important you think that use
>> case still is.
>
> archive_timeout > 0 works just fine at generating files even when
> quiet, or if it does not, it is a bug.
>
> So I don't understand your comments, please explain.

If the standby has restore_command set but not primary_conninfo, then
it will never make a direct connection to the master. So anything
that's based on extending that protocol won't get used in that case.

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