On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 10:34:14PM +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 19 December 2012 22:19, Joshua Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
> >
> >> It stalled because the patch author decided not to implement the
> >> request to detect recovery.conf in data directory, which allows
> >> backwards compatibility.
> >
> > Well, I don't think we had agreement on how important backwards compatibility for recovery.conf was, particularly
noton the whole recovery.conf/recovery.done functionality and the wierd formatting of recovery.conf.
>
> As ever, we spent much energy on debating backwards compatibility
> rather than just solving the problem it posed, which is fairly easy to
> solve.
Let me also add that I am tired of having recovery.conf improvement
stalled by backward compatibility concerns. At this point, let's just
trash recovery.conf backward compatibility and move on.
And I don't want to hear complaints about tool breakage either. These
are external tools, not shipped with community Postgres, and they will
just have to adjust. I will be glad to beat all complainants into the
ground for the good of the community. ;-) We just can't operate like
this, and if we allowed these things to block us in the past, Postgres
would be a royal mess today!
At this point backward compatibility has paralized us from fixing a
recovery.conf API that everyone agrees is non-optimal, and this has
gone on for multiple major releases. I don't care what we have to do,
just clean this up for 9.3!
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +