On 3 December 2013 18:46, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello > <fabriziome...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Christian Kruse <christ...@2ndquadrant.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Fabrizio, >>> >>> looks good to me. I did some testing on 9.2.4, 9.2.5 and HEAD. It >>> applies and compiles w/o errors or warnings. I set up a master and two >>> hot standbys replicating from the master, one with 5 minutes delay and >>> one without delay. After that I created a new database and generated >>> some test data: >>> >>> CREATE TABLE test (val INTEGER); >>> INSERT INTO test (val) (SELECT * FROM generate_series(0, 1000000)); >>> >>> The non-delayed standby nearly instantly had the data replicated, the >>> delayed standby was replicated after exactly 5 minutes. I did not >>> notice any problems, errors or warnings. >>> >> >> Thanks for your review Christian... > > 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.
I had that objection and others. Since then many people have requested this feature and have persuaded me that this is worth having and that my objections are minor points. I now agree with the need for the feature, almost as written. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
