Le 15 juil. 09 à 23:03, Heikki Linnakangas a écrit :
2. The primary should have no business reading back from the archive.
The standby can read from the archive, as it can today.
Sorry to insist, but I'm not sold on your consensus here, yet:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-07/msg00486.php
There's a true need for the solution to be simple to install, and
providing a side channel for the standby to go read the archives
itself isn't it. Furthermore, the counter-argument against having the
primary able to send data from the archives to some standby is that it
should still work when primary's dead, but as this is only done in the
setup phase, I don't see that being able to continue preparing a not-
yet-ready standby against a dead primary is buying us anything.
Now, I tried proposing to implement an archive server as a postmaster
child to have a reference implementation of an archive command for
"basic" cases, and provide the ability to give data from the archive
to slave(s). But this is getting too much into the implementation
details for my current understanding of them :)
Regards,
--
dim
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
