Re: Should we remove "not fast" promotion at all?

On 08/08/2013 11:01 AM, Andres Freund wrote:

> I don't think anybody working on related areas of the code thinks it's
> rock solid.
> But anyway, I just don't see the downside of allowing problem
> analysis. You're free to do more testing, review, whatever before the
> release.

I'm 100% with you that we ought to keep the slow failover code around
and accessible to debugging.  What I'm asking is whether it should still
be explicitly available to users, and the default.  Based on your
feedback, it's sounding like it should be.

-- 
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com