On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 11:46 +0200, Markus Wanner wrote:
> On 10/06/2010 10:01 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > The code to implement your desired option is
> > more complex and really should come later.
>
> I'm sorry, but I think of that exactly the opposite way.
I see why you say that. Dimitri's suggestion is an enhancement on the
basic feature, just as Heikki's is. My reply was directed at Heikki, but
should also apply to Dimitri's idea also.
> The timeout for
> automatic continuation after waiting for a standby is the addition. The
> wait state of the master is there anyway, whether or not it's bound by a
> timeout. The timeout option should thus come later.
Adding timeout is very little code. We can take that out of the patch if
that's an objection.
-- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.comPostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services