On 2015-03-15 14:51:46 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 2:27 PM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> > wrote: > > > On 2015-03-12 15:52:02 +0100, Andres Freund wrote: > > > /* > > > * Override any inconsistent requests. Not that this is a change > > > * of behaviour in 9.5; prior to this we simply ignored a request > > > * to pause if hot_standby = off, which was surprising behaviour. > > > */ > > > if (recoveryTargetAction == RECOVERY_TARGET_ACTION_PAUSE && > > > recoveryTargetActionSet && > > > standbyState == STANDBY_DISABLED) > > > recoveryTargetAction = RECOVERY_TARGET_ACTION_SHUTDOWN; > > > > While it's easy enough to fix I rather dislike the whole intent here > > though. *Silently* switching the mode of operation in a rather > > significant way seems like a bad idea to me. At the very least we need > > to emit a LOG message about this; but I think it'd be much better to > > error out instead. > > > > <9.5's behaviour was already quite surprising. But changing things to a > > different surprising behaviour seems like a bad idea. > > > > +1. Especially for "sensitive" operations like this, having > predictable-behavior-or-error is usually the best choice.
Yea. Looking further, it's even worse right now. We'll change the target to shutdown when hot_standby = off, but iff it was set in the config file. But the default value is (and was, although configured differently) documented to be 'pause'; so if it's not configured explicitly we still will promote. At least I can't read that out of the docs. Personally I think we just should change the default to 'shutdown' for all cases. That makes documentation and behaviour less surprising. And makes experimenting less dangerous, since you can just start again. 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
