Re: Requiring recovery.signal or standby.signal when recovering with a backup_label

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Michael Paquier
Тема Re: Requiring recovery.signal or standby.signal when recovering with a backup_label
Дата
Msg-id ZUBNauUNbeq5xTtf@paquier.xyz
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Requiring recovery.signal or standby.signal when recovering with a backup_label  (Roberto Mello <roberto.mello@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 10:32:28AM -0600, Roberto Mello wrote:
> I realize the original use of "touch" is a valid shortcut for what I
> suggest above, however that will be less clear for the not-so-un*x-inclined
> users of Postgres, while for some it'll be downright confusing, IMHO. It
> also provides the advantage of being crystal clear on what needs to be done
> to fix the problem.

Indeed, "touch" may be better in this path if we'd throw an ERROR to
enforce a given policy, and that's more consistent with the rest of
the area.
--
Michael

Вложения

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Requiring recovery.signal or standby.signal when recovering with a backup_label
Следующее
От: Ajin Cherian
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby