Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf
Date
Msg-id CA+U5nM+=m2h+Qf5Pr4bp+-3ovjV_riE2zgeN0oCqSRS0Hs2P9w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 7:46 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> If you change a parameter that only has effect during recovery then
>> must get an error if it is changed during normal running.
>
> I don't see why.  If you're in normal running and someone changes a
> parameter that is irrelevant during normal running, that should be a
> no-op, not an error.

How will it be made into a no-op, except by having a specific flag to
show that it is irrelevant during normal running?

Fujii is saying we only need to mark GUCs if we keep recovery.conf. I
am saying we need to mark them whatever we do elsewhere.

--
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Avoiding shutdown checkpoint at failover
Next
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: IDLE in transaction introspection