Re: Summary and Plan for Hot Standby
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Summary and Plan for Hot Standby |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 24573.1258323425@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: Summary and Plan for Hot Standby (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Summary and Plan for Hot Standby
Re: Summary and Plan for Hot Standby Re: Summary and Plan for Hot Standby |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
> So I'm in favor of committing part of the HS code even if there are
> known failure conditions, as long as those conditions are well-defined.
If we're thinking of committing something that is known broken, I would
want to have a clearly defined and trust-inspiring escape strategy.
"We can always revert the patch later" inspires absolutely zero
confidence here, because in a patch this large there are always going to
be overlaps with other later patches. If it gets to be February and HS
is still unshippable, reverting is going to be a tricky and risky
affair.
I agree with Heikki that it would be better not to commit as long as
any clear showstoppers remain unresolved.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: