Simon Riggs wrote: > I am surprised at your arguments for simplicity. With Hot Standby you > have insisted that everything should be in place. With SR you seem to > have just stopped at a barely working, poorly documented implementation.
That's opposite to my recollection of the hot standby development. I simplified and ripped out a lot of stuff from the original patch. If you insist, I'll work out a patch to send a signal to startup process after every fsync(), but it really doesn't seem very important given that there's always a delay there anyway. > We both know you can fix these things easily and quickly. Please do so. That's a plural form. What's the other thing you're referring to? > Not because I say so, but because everybody else will soon notice that > you could have and did not. Bollocks. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
