Hi,
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 5:54 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
Thanks, I started to look at this again now.
Thanks a lot!
I found the global LogstreamResult variable very confusing. It meant
different things in different processes. So I replaced it with
Fujii Masao wrote:
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 12:33 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira
eu...@timbira.com wrote:
BTW, are you going to submit another WIP patch for next commitfest?
Well, Heikki was going to keep working on this
Recently, the development of SR is not progressing because of
the indecision on whether walreceiver should be a subprocess
of the startup process (i.e., a stand-alone program), or of
postmaster. Since time is running out, I'd like to discuss
about this and advance the project.
The related
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 3:23 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
wrt. synchronous replication, if someone else has the cycles to look at
it, that would be great. I got stuck on the postmaster-process or not
question Fujii raised again now, not being able to
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 12:33 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira
eu...@timbira.com wrote:
BTW, are you going to submit another WIP patch for next commitfest?
Well, Heikki was going to keep working on this and Hot Standby
Hi,
Recently, the development of SR is not progressing because of
the indecision on whether walreceiver should be a subprocess
of the startup process (i.e., a stand-alone program), or of
postmaster. Since time is running out, I'd like to discuss
about this and advance the project.
The related
On Nov 2, 2009, at 5:06 AM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Recently, the development of SR is not progressing because of
the indecision on whether walreceiver should be a subprocess
of the startup process (i.e., a stand-alone program), or of
postmaster. Since time is running out,
Fujii Masao escreveu:
IMO, walreceiver should be a subprocess of postmaster for
the following reasons.
+1. I agree that the first version should be as close as possible to
postmaster. My points are: (i) it will be easier to install (no need to
install another third-party software), (ii) it
On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira
eu...@timbira.com wrote:
BTW, are you going to submit another WIP patch for next commitfest?
Well, Heikki was going to keep working on this and Hot Standby between
CommitFests until it gets committed, but things seem to be stalled
at the
Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira
eu...@timbira.com wrote:
BTW, are you going to submit another WIP patch for next commitfest?
Well, Heikki was going to keep working on this and Hot Standby between
CommitFests until it gets committed, but things
Euler Taveira de Oliveira wrote:
Fujii Masao escreveu:
IMO, walreceiver should be a subprocess of postmaster for
the following reasons.
+1. I agree that the first version should be as close as possible to
postmaster. My points are: (i) it will be easier to install (no need to
install
11 matches
Mail list logo
