Request a Demo
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: pg_streamrecv for 9.1? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Gurjeet Singh
Subject Re: pg_streamrecv for 9.1?
Date
Msg-id AANLkTikh2m3B+UCSZBMJQs5Emy=y1+v43nrk2-+6WOdc@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread
In response to Re: pg_streamrecv for 9.1?  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: pg_streamrecv for 9.1?
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 1:42 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
On Dec 29, 2010, at 1:01 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Is it really stable enough for bin/?  My impression of the state of
> affairs is that there is nothing whatsoever about replication that
> is really stable yet.

Well, that's not stopping us from shipping a core feature called "replication".  I'll defer to others on how mature pg_streamrecv is, but if it's no worse than replication in general I think putting it in bin/ is the right thing to do.

As the README says that is not self-contained (for no fault of its own) and one should typically set archive_command to guarantee zero WAL loss.

<quote>
TODO: Document some ways of setting up an archive_command that works well together with pg_streamrecv.
</quote>

    I think implementing just that TODO might make it a candidate.

    I have neither used it nor read the code, but if it works as advertised then it is definitely a +1 from me; no preference of bin/ or contrib/, since the community will have to maintain it anyway.

Regards,
--
gurjeet.singh
@ EnterpriseDB - The Enterprise Postgres Company
http://www.EnterpriseDB.com

singh.gurjeet@{ gmail | yahoo }.com
Twitter/Skype: singh_gurjeet

Mail sent from my BlackLaptop device

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Streaming replication as a separate permissions
Next
From: David Fetter
Date:
Subject: Re: "writable CTEs"