On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 10:33:13AM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > And I think it would make sense to wait by default, but we could then also > have a commandline parameter that says "don't wait, instead error out in > case the checkpoint isn't done". > > Or something like that?
Yes, that would be the idea. You still need to cover the case where both instances are on the same timeline, in which case you could wait for a checkpoint forever, so we'd need to change the current behavior a bit by making sure that we always throw an error if both nodes are still on the same timeline after the timeout (see TAP test 005_same_timeline.pl). I am not sure that you need a separate option to control the case where you don't want to wait though. Perhaps we could have a separate switch, but a user could also just set --timeout=0 to match that behavior. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
