Re: DeArchiver process - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: DeArchiver process
Date
Msg-id CA+U5nMJrcn_fn4z-P=-tV9VyvrReBWf9BSJ-+-=5PgHVoiQVVA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: DeArchiver process  (Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndQuadrant.fr>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
<dimitri@2ndquadrant.fr> wrote:
> Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> writes:
>> If we introduce "walrestore" process, pg_standby seems no longer useful.
>
> pg_standby is one possible restore_command, right?  I had understood
> that walrestore would be the process that cares for running that
> command, not another implementation of it.

Yes, that was the idea.

> That said, I would really like us to provide a default restore command,
> so if you had any intend of handling the restoring command in the
> walrestore process, by all means, go ahead :)

A different proposal, I think. Not no, just not here and now.

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


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Dimitri Fontaine
Date:
Subject: Re: DeArchiver process
Next
From: Florian Pflug
Date:
Subject: Re: Term positions in GIN fulltext index