Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > So, I proposed this patch previously and I still think it's a > good idea, but it got voted down on the grounds that it didn't > deal with clock drift. I view that as insufficient reason to > reject the feature, but others disagreed. Unless some of those > people have changed their minds, I don't think this patch has > much future here.
There are many things that a system admin can get wrong. Failing to supply this feature because the sysadmin might not be running ntpd (or equivalent) correctly seems to me to be like not having the software do fsync because the sysadmin might not have turned off write-back buffering on drives without persistent storage. Either way, poor system management can defeat the feature. Either way, I see no reason to withhold the feature from those who manage their systems in a sane fashion. -- Kevin Grittner EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
