Re: Should we remove "not fast" promotion at all? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Fujii Masao
Subject Re: Should we remove "not fast" promotion at all?
Date
Msg-id CAHGQGwGz=oe1SmxBQy_C8-OJ285Ss_RmF9gqaBDV_R=pS3uypQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Should we remove "not fast" promotion at all?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Should we remove "not fast" promotion at all?  (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 1:07 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>> FWIW I'd rather keep plain promotion for a release or two. TBH, I have a
>>> bit of trust issues regarding the new method, and I'd like to be able to
>>> test potential issues against a stock postgres by doing a normal instead
>>> of a fast promotion.
>
>> So we should add new option specifying the promotion mode, into pg_ctl?
>> Currently pg_ctl cannot trigger the normal promotion.
>
> It would be silly to add such an option if we want to remove the old mode
> in a release or two.

Without such an option, a user cannot easily trigger the "normal" promotion
when we find some problems in fast promotion. In this case, a user needs to
create the "promote" file and send the SIGUSR1 signal to postmaster by hand.
Or needs to execute pg_ctl promote by using old version (e.g., 9.2) of pg_ctl.
Seems confusing.

Regards,

-- 
Fujii Masao



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Dimitri Fontaine
Date:
Subject: Re: updated emacs configuration
Next
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: [9.3 bug] disk space in pg_xlog increases during archive recovery