Re: recovery_connections cannot start
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine@hi-media.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2010-04-27T14:52:46Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Apr 27, 2010, at 9:20 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> wrote: > On Tue, 2010-04-27 at 15:10 +0200, Dimitri Fontaine wrote: >> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >>> Treating the string "true" as a special case seems like a kludge to >>> me. Maybe a robust set of internal commands wouldn't be a kludge, >>> but >>> that's not what's being proposed here. I guess it's just a matter >>> of >>> opinion. >> >> I don't see how to have internal commands without having special >> cases >> for the setting, and I did propose "pg_archive_bypass" as the name. I >> guess the implementation would be what Simon was talking about, >> though. >> >> I don't see "true" as meaningful in the context of an >> archive_command… > > Saying "its a kludge" doesn't really address the issue and goes > nowhere > towards fixing it. If we don't like the proposal, fine, then what is > the > alternative solution? I proposed one upthread. ...Robert