Hi,
Sorry for the delay.
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 6:04 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> but before we go to DB_IN_PRODUCTION?
>
> I think it can be either, so I'll go with your proposal.
I also think so.
> (I'm aware Fujii-san is asleep right now, so we should expect another
> viewpoint before tomorrow).
I'd like to avoid adding new parameter for warm-standby
if possible because currently the setup of it is already
complicated. But, I don't have another good idea yet other
than the already proposed. Sorry.
Personally, I'd rather make pg_standby delete a trigger file
when the timeline history file is requested even if this would
break the current behavior, than the setup of warm-standby
becomes more complicated.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
