Re: Request for vote to move forward with recovery.conf overhaul - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Request for vote to move forward with recovery.conf overhaul
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqS-dTQ6bX91y3WqCmJ1FKr-avMWzrZo48FDir36xGpFYA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Request for vote to move forward with recovery.conf overhaul  (Greg Smith <greg@2ndQuadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers


On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
There are currently 20 "Needs Review" and 14 "Waiting on Author" things left in the queue, so it's not quite that there's no time left.  There really isn't very much left to do on this.  The rough consensus idea from before takes a while to describe, but there was not a complicated implementation in that.  The overlap with the still possible to commit SET PERSISTENT is probably the worst potential issue this is facing now, but that's not even a real issue yet.
OK thanks for your feedback.
 
If you're out of time to work on it and want to back out of here having made good progress, that's fine.  I'd be tempted to work on this thing myself for a bit just to try and finally get it done.  If it gets punted forward, we'll be right back to facing bit rot and remembering what was going on again, which is what killed the momentum toward committing this the last time.
I think I will be able to work on that but not before Monday. This depends also on how REINDEX CONCURRENTLY goes...
--
Michael

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
Next
From: Satoshi Nagayasu
Date:
Subject: Re: Fix pgstattuple/pgstatindex to use regclass-type as the argument