Re: Should we remove "not fast" promotion at all? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Josh Berkus
Subject Re: Should we remove "not fast" promotion at all?
Date
Msg-id 5203EDDD.2020804@agliodbs.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Should we remove "not fast" promotion at all?  (Tomonari Katsumata <t.katsumata1122@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Should we remove "not fast" promotion at all?  (Tomonari Katsumata <katsumata.tomonari@po.ntts.co.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 08/08/2013 11:01 AM, Andres Freund wrote:

> I don't think anybody working on related areas of the code thinks it's
> rock solid.
> But anyway, I just don't see the downside of allowing problem
> analysis. You're free to do more testing, review, whatever before the
> release.

I'm 100% with you that we ought to keep the slow failover code around
and accessible to debugging.  What I'm asking is whether it should still
be explicitly available to users, and the default.  Based on your
feedback, it's sounding like it should be.

-- 
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Merlin Moncure
Date:
Subject: Re: StrategyGetBuffer optimization, take 2
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: question about HTTP API