On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Michael Banck
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, May 02, 2017 at 11:13:58AM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > Looks good to me as well. Applied, with only a minor further docs
> addition
> > saying that this is the default also on the high availability page.
>
> I understand
Hi,
On Tue, May 02, 2017 at 11:13:58AM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Looks good to me as well. Applied, with only a minor further docs addition
> saying that this is the default also on the high availability page.
I understand this is late, but a colleague alerted me to the following
behaviour
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 3:43 AM, Masahiko Sawada
wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 11:05 PM, Huong Dangminh
> wrote:
> >> >>> I would refrain from doing that, having some parameters listed in
> the
> >> >>> tests makes the intention behind those perl routines clear.
> >> >
> >> > Hmm, you've got
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 11:05 PM, Huong Dangminh
wrote:
>> >>> I would refrain from doing that, having some parameters listed in the
>> >>> tests makes the intention behind those perl routines clear.
>> >
>> > Hmm, you've got a point. But when we changed the default values
>> > related to replicat
> >>> I would refrain from doing that, having some parameters listed in the
> >>> tests makes the intention behind those perl routines clear.
> >
> > Hmm, you've got a point. But when we changed the default values
> > related to replication we dropped some explicitly settings from the
> > regressio
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 4:33 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Huong Dangminh
> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Masahiko Sawada
>>> wrote:
>>> > Thank you for updating the patch. Also maybe we can update line in
>>> > PostgresNode.pm where hot_standby is
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Huong Dangminh
wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Masahiko Sawada
>> wrote:
>> > Thank you for updating the patch. Also maybe we can update line in
>> > PostgresNode.pm where hot_standby is set to on explicitly.
>>
>> I would refrain from doing that, havi
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> > Thank you for updating the patch. Also maybe we can update line in
> > PostgresNode.pm where hot_standby is set to on explicitly.
>
> I would refrain from doing that, having some parameters listed in the
> tests makes the intention
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> Thank you for updating the patch. Also maybe we can update line in
> PostgresNode.pm where hot_standby is set to on explicitly.
I would refrain from doing that, having some parameters listed in the
tests makes the intention behind those p
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Huong Dangminh
wrote:
> Thanks all for your comments.
>
>> Magnus Hagander writes:
>> > +1. I definitely think we should do it, and 10 would be the time to do
>> it.
>>
>> Agreed. It's mainly a historical accident that the default is what it
>> is,
>> I think.
>>
Thanks all for your comments.
> Magnus Hagander writes:
> > +1. I definitely think we should do it, and 10 would be the time to do
> it.
>
> Agreed. It's mainly a historical accident that the default is what it
> is,
> I think.
>
> > I wonder if we should also consider changing the standby err
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 9:52 PM, Magnus Hagander
wrote:
>
> I wonder if we should also consider changing the standby error message to
> be a WARNING instead of an ERROR. So that if you try to start up a standby
> with hot_standby=on but master with wal_level=replica it would turn into a
> cold st
Magnus Hagander writes:
> +1. I definitely think we should do it, and 10 would be the time to do it.
Agreed. It's mainly a historical accident that the default is what it is,
I think.
> I wonder if we should also consider changing the standby error message to
> be a WARNING instead of an ERROR.
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 1:25 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 07:33:27AM +, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
> > From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org
> > > [mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Masahiko
> Sawada
> > > The idea of changing the default value s
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 07:33:27AM +, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
> From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org
> > [mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Masahiko Sawada
> > The idea of changing the default value seems good to me but I'm not sure
> > it's good idea to change the
From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org
> [mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Masahiko Sawada
> The idea of changing the default value seems good to me but I'm not sure
> it's good idea to change the default value now under the circumstances where
> we're focus on stabilizatio
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 9:36 AM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 26 April 2017 at 08:30, Huong Dangminh wrote:
>
>> Default for hot_standby parameter should be "on" from PostgreSQL 10?
>>
>> In PostgreSQL 10, -w option is default for [pg_ctl start].
>> So in order to start standby we have to setting hot
On 26 April 2017 at 08:30, Huong Dangminh wrote:
> Default for hot_standby parameter should be "on" from PostgreSQL 10?
>
> In PostgreSQL 10, -w option is default for [pg_ctl start].
> So in order to start standby we have to setting hot_standby to "on" or
> start standby with -W option.
Yeah. Th
Hi,
Default for hot_standby parameter should be "on" from PostgreSQL 10?
In PostgreSQL 10, -w option is default for [pg_ctl start].
So in order to start standby we have to setting hot_standby to "on" or
start standby with -W option.
Change hot_standby to "on" will fix this inconvenience.
wal_
19 matches
Mail list logo
