Re: Re: BUG #13685: Archiving while idle every archive_timeout with wal_level hot_standby - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: Re: BUG #13685: Archiving while idle every archive_timeout with wal_level hot_standby
Date
Msg-id 20160212175635.6zledt7gvww24wfj@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Re: BUG #13685: Archiving while idle every archive_timeout with wal_level hot_standby  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Re: BUG #13685: Archiving while idle every archive_timeout with wal_level hot_standby
List pgsql-hackers
On 2016-02-12 12:37:35 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 4:18 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> > I'm not really a fan. I'd rather change existing callers to add a
> > 'flags' bitmask argument. Right now there can't really be XLogInserts()
> > in extension code, so that's pretty ok to change.
> 
> Yeah, but to what benefit?  You're just turning a smaller patch into a
> bigger one and requiring churning a bunch of code that wouldn't
> otherwise need to be touched.  I think Michael has a good point.

It has the advantage of not ending up with an extra interface, that
we're otherwise never going to get rid of? If not now, when would we
remove it? Sure it touches a few more lines, but that's entirely trivial
mechanical changes, so what?

Andres



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Teodor Sigaev
Date:
Subject: Re: Fuzzy substring searching with the pg_trgm extension
Next
From: David Steele
Date:
Subject: Re: WIP: SCRAM authentication