Re: DeArchiver process - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: DeArchiver process
Date
Msg-id CA+U5nMKBqarfzkXvfCgbhhRhvEy2m-HXk1096ss7E9ZLygn8rw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: DeArchiver process  (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: DeArchiver process
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 2:36 AM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:

> If we introduce "walrestore" process, pg_standby seems no longer useful.
> We should get rid of it?

Removing things too quickly can cause problems. There's no harm done
by keeping it a while longer.

I agree it should go, just want to be absolutely clear that its no
longer needed for any use case.

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


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: Further plans to refactor xlog.c
Next
From: Miroslav Šimulčík
Date:
Subject: Storing original rows before update or delete