On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 10:36 PM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> Since an optional second argument wait_for_archive of pg_stop_backup >> has been introduced in PostgreSQL 10 we can choose whether wait for >> archiving. But my colleagues found that we can do pg_stop_backup with >> wait_for_archive = true on the standby server but it actually doesn't >> wait for WAL archiving. Because this behavior is not documented and we >> cannot find out it without reading source code it will confuse the >> user. >> >> I think we can raise an error when pg_stop_backup with >> wait_for_archive = true is executed on the standby. Attached patch >> change it so that. > > > Wouldn't it be better to make it *work*? If you have archive_mode=always, it > makes sense to want to wait on the standby as well, does it not? >
Yes, ideally it will be better to make it wait for WAL archiving on standby server when archive_mode=always. But I think it would be for PG11 item, and this item is for PG10. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
