recovery consistent != hot standby - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject recovery consistent != hot standby
Date
Msg-id AANLkTikipmueIT0OUrmDsqzeWMDuAwuq5nOsjoYJH-ho@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: recovery consistent != hot standby
List pgsql-hackers
While looking through postmaster.c and xlog.c I discovered that we're
being a little bit loose about our use of terminology.  Maybe this was
right when committed (I think, at that point, Hot Standby was always
on) but it's not right any more.  It appears that we only enter the
PM_RECOVERY_CONSISTENT when Hot Standby is enabled; otherwise, we
remain in PM_RECOVERY even after reaching consistency.  I think, then,
that the state, and the signal which triggers it are misnamed.  For
the avoidance of confusion, I'd like to propose that we rename as
follows:

PM_RECOVERY_CONSISTENT -> PM_HOT_STANDBY
PMSIGNAL_RECOVERY_CONSISTENT -> PMSIGNAL_BEGIN_HOT_STANDBY

Objections?  Better ideas?

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Mike Rylander
Date:
Subject: Re: JSON manipulation functions
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: fillfactor gets set to zero for toast tables