On 01/02/13 20:43, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Sunday, 27 January 2013, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com
<mailto:robertmh...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> If we're going to start installing safeguards against doing stupid
> things, there's a long list of scenarios that happen far more
> regularly than this ever will and cause far more damage.
+1
+1
...and there are other areas that we could spend our energy on that
would be more worthwhile I think. One I'd like to see is the opposite of:
$ pg_ctl promote
i.e:
$ pg_ctl demote
So a "retired" master would read a (newly supplied perhaps)
recovery.conf and start to apply changes from there (with suitable
safeguards). We have failover pretty painless now... but reconstruction
of the original primary as a new standby is still too
fiddly/resource/time consuming etc.
Regards
Mark
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
