Robert Haas wrote:
> Furthermore, if you're wanting to use pg_standby, you might be
> forgiven for thinking that you should set standby_mode = on; but in
> fact that's exactly the wrong thing to do.
Yeah, I think that's the main weakness of the name "standby_mode". It's
pretty descriptive otherwise, we call that mode of operation "standby"
everywhere, and always have.
I'm not sure I dare to say this out loud after Simon's previous
outburst, but removing or renaming pg_standby would help with that...
> One possibility that occurs to me is that we could call it something
> like integrated_standby; but I'm not attached to that.
Anything with the word 'standby' in it suffers from the same problem,
maybe not as badly but still.
-- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
