On 2013-12-13 11:56:47 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote: > On 12 December 2013 21:58, Fabrízio de Royes Mello > <fabriziome...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Reviewing the committed patch I noted that the "CheckForStandbyTrigger()" > > after the delay was removed. > > > > If we promote the standby during the delay and don't check the trigger > > immediately after the delay, then we will replay undesired WALs records. > > > > The attached patch add this check. > > I removed it because it was after the pause. I'll replace it, but > before the pause.
Doesn't after the pause make more sense? If somebody promoted while we were waiting, we want to recognize that before rolling forward? The wait can take a long while after all? Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund 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
