Re: Remove non-fast promotion Re: Should we remove a fallbackpromotion? take 2 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Remove non-fast promotion Re: Should we remove a fallbackpromotion? take 2
Date
Msg-id 20200421063622.GA33034@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Remove non-fast promotion Re: Should we remove a fallbackpromotion? take 2  (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>)
Responses Re: Remove non-fast promotion Re: Should we remove a fallbackpromotion? take 2  (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>)
Re: Remove non-fast promotion Re: Should we remove a fallbackpromotion? take 2  (Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais <jgdr@dalibo.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 03:29:54PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> Yeah, but that's not documented. So I don't think that we need to keep
> the backward-compatibility for that.
>
> Also in that case, non-fast promotion is triggered. Since my patch
> tries to remove non-fast promotion, it's intentional to prevent them
> from doing that. But you think that we should not drop that because
> there are still some users for that?

It would be good to ask around to folks maintaining HA solutions about
that change at least, as there could be a point in still letting
promotion to happen in this case, but switch silently to the fast
path.
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: Remove non-fast promotion Re: Should we remove a fallbackpromotion? take 2
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: design for parallel backup