On 12/02/2014 06:25 AM, Alex Shulgin wrote:
>> I am not in favor of this part. It may be better to let the users know
>> > that their old configuration is not valid anymore with an error. This
>> > patch cuts in the flesh with a huge axe, let's be sure that users do
>> > not ignore the side pain effects, or recovery.conf would be simply
>> > ignored and users would not be aware of that.
> Yeah, that is good point.
>
> I'd be in favor of a solution that works the same way as before the
> patch, without the need for extra trigger files, etc., but that doesn't
> seem to be nearly possible.
As previously discussed, there are ways to avoid having a trigger file
for replication. However, it's hard to avoid having one for PITR
recovery; at least, I can't think of a method which isn't just as
awkward, and we might as well stick with the awkward method we know.
> Whatever tricks we might employ will likely
> be defeated by the fact that the oldschool user will fail to *include*
> recovery.conf in the main conf file.
Well, can we merge this patch and then fight out what to do for the
transitional users as a separate patch?
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
