Re: Reading recovery.conf earlier
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Reading recovery.conf earlier |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1260232282.3665.161.camel@ebony обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Reading recovery.conf earlier (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2009-12-07 at 19:21 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes: > > On Mon, 2009-12-07 at 19:07 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > >> Why not just follow the example of postresql.conf? > > > Much better idea. > > Rather than reinventing all the infrastructure associated with GUCs, > maybe we should just make the recovery parameters *be* GUCs. At least > for all the ones that could be of interest outside the recovery > subprocess itself. > > As an example of the kind of thing you'll find yourself coding if you > make an independent facility: how will people find out the active > values? You're right, I was literally just writing that code. Also, currently I have two parameters: wal_standby_info and recovery_connections. If this was a GUC, then I could just have one parameter: recovery_connections. So, much agreed. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: