Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful

* Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> [100510 06:03]:
 
> A problem with using the name "max_standby_delay" for Tom's suggestion
> is that it sounds like a hard limit, which it isn't. But if we name it
> something like:

I'ld still rather an "if your killing something, make sure you kill
enough to get all the way current" behaviour, but that's just me....

I'm want to run my standbys in a always current mode... But if I decide
to play with a lagged HR, I really want to make sure there is some
mechanism to cap the lag, and the "cap" is something I can understand
and use to make a reasonable estimate as to when data I know is live on
the primary will be seen on the standby...

bonus points if it works similarly for archive recovery ;-)

a.


-- 
Aidan Van Dyk                                             Create like a god,
aidan@highrise.ca                                       command like a king,
http://www.highrise.ca/                                   work like a slave.