On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > On 2016-06-03 14:00:00 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 8:44 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: >> > I'm not convinced of that. Hiding unexpected issues for longer, just to >> > continue kind-of-operating, can make the impact of problems a lot worse, >> > and it makes it very hard to actually learn about the issues. >> >> So if we made this a WARNING rather than an ERROR, it wouldn't hiding >> the issue, but it would be less likely to break things that worked >> before. No? > > Except that we're then accepting the (proven!) potential for data > loss. We're talking about a single report of an restore_command setting > odd permissions. Which can easily be fixed.
Well, I think that having restore_command start failing after a minor release update can cause data loss, too. Or even an outage. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: 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
