Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] pg_standby

2007-04-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Simon Riggs wrote: > On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 13:29 -0500, Doug Knight wrote: > > > I would preserve the existing trigger function as little t "-t", and > > maybe implement a catchup trigger function as big t "-T"? Set it up so > > that if the first attempt to find the WAL file postgres is currently

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] pg_standby

2007-03-08 Thread Doug Knight
Excellent. Once you're ready, fire it over and I'll test it on our config. Doug On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 18:34 +, Simon Riggs wrote: > On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 13:29 -0500, Doug Knight wrote: > > > I would preserve the existing trigger function as little t "-t", and > > maybe implement a catchup tr

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] pg_standby

2007-03-08 Thread Simon Riggs
On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 13:29 -0500, Doug Knight wrote: > I would preserve the existing trigger function as little t "-t", and > maybe implement a catchup trigger function as big t "-T"? Set it up so > that if the first attempt to find the WAL file postgres is currently > requesting succeeds, skip o

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] pg_standby

2007-03-08 Thread Doug Knight
Hi Simon, I would preserve the existing trigger function as little t "-t", and maybe implement a catchup trigger function as big t "-T"? Set it up so that if the first attempt to find the WAL file postgres is currently requesting succeeds, skip over the trigger check. If the first attempt fails, th