Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Thread: min_recovery_apply_delay

min_recovery_apply_delay

From
Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Wouldn't a better name be recovery_min_apply_delay?

Other parameters are usually named something_min_something.

Re: min_recovery_apply_delay

From
Fabrízio de Royes Mello
Date:

Em sexta-feira, 9 de maio de 2014, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> escreveu:
Wouldn't a better name be recovery_min_apply_delay?


+1

The original name was recovery_apply_delay but in some point of review it was changed to reflect better the limit.
 
Other parameters are usually named something_min_something.


Ok

If you want I can send a patch to change it.
 
Fabrízio Mello.


--
Fabrízio de Royes Mello
Consultoria/Coaching PostgreSQL

Re: min_recovery_apply_delay

From
Robert Haas
Date:
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 10:44 PM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello
<fabriziomello@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Wouldn't a better name be recovery_min_apply_delay?
>
> +1

Works for me.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: min_recovery_apply_delay

From
Fabrízio de Royes Mello
Date:
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 10:44 PM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello
> <fabriziomello@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Wouldn't a better name be recovery_min_apply_delay?
> >
> > +1
>
> Works for me.
>

Done!!

--
Fabrízio de Royes Mello
Consultoria/Coaching PostgreSQL
>> Timbira: http://www.timbira.com.br
>> Blog sobre TI: http://fabriziomello.blogspot.com
>> Perfil Linkedin: http://br.linkedin.com/in/fabriziomello
>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/fabriziomello
Attachment

Re: min_recovery_apply_delay

From
Tom Lane
Date:
Fabrízio de Royes Mello <fabriziomello@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 10:44 PM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello
>> <fabriziomello@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Wouldn't a better name be recovery_min_apply_delay?

>>> +1

>> Works for me.

> Done!!

Since there were no objections, and time is growing (very) short,
I'm going to go ahead and push this in.  It looks safe enough for
a last-minute change.
        regards, tom lane