Re: [REVIEW] pg_last_xact_insert_timestamp - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: [REVIEW] pg_last_xact_insert_timestamp
Date
Msg-id CA+U5nMJ2cg+h5aBToftq3jr2z8gtLEDLT_7NVjEJjD=rzg1tRg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [REVIEW] pg_last_xact_insert_timestamp  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [REVIEW] pg_last_xact_insert_timestamp  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:

> It also strikes me that anything
> that is based on augmenting the walsender/walreceiver protocol leaves
> anyone who is using WAL shipping out in the cold.  I'm not clear from
> the comments you or Simon have made how important you think that use
> case still is.

archive_timeout > 0 works just fine at generating files even when
quiet, or if it does not, it is a bug.

So I don't understand your comments, please explain.

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


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: pgsql_fdw, FDW for PostgreSQL server
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [REVIEW] pg_last_xact_insert_timestamp