Re: hot standby - merged up to CVS HEAD

On Tue, 2009-07-14 at 21:12 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> 
> 1. Downloaded norecoveryprocs-1.patch from
> http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/49A64D73.6090302@enterprisedb.com

http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4A4DBF8F.8040007@enterprisedb.com

I have to confess that I had no idea that the above discussion had taken
place. (The title wasn't anything to do with Hot Standby, nor did anyone
copy me in; I don't read every email).

I've said very clearly that I would work on this for 8.5 [at the
developer meeting] and also that it wouldn't be ready for the first
commit fest, when asked. I was told recently that someone heard the
patch was dead; I've never said that, but I would like a summer holiday.

It's going to be very confusing if people submit their own versions of
it. So now we have mine, Heikki's and Robert's. I'd like this to stop
please, have a little faith and a little patience. Presumably Robert's
rebasing patch is best place to start from now for later work.

Welcome to add notes here
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Hot_Standby

On other points: there was a bug related to subtransaction handling in
the initial startup info of Hot Standby. It could not have been
committed without that being fixed.

In my own recent review, I've noted two design flaw bugs:
* AccessExclusiveLocks held at startup are not properly initialised
* AccessExclusiveLocks held by prepared transactions are not handled
correctly at termination of recovery - the lock owner needs to be
transferred or we redesign somehow

I'm sure it needs much work yet. Not least of which will be re-checking
all of the previous bugs to ensure no regressions in translation.

Thanks,

-- Simon Riggs           www.2ndQuadrant.comPostgreSQL Training, Services and Support