On 2020/04/22 10:53, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
At Wed, 22 Apr 2020 10:28:07 +0900, Ian Barwick <ian.barw...@2ndquadrant.com>
wrote in
On 2020/04/22 6:53, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
On 2020-Apr-21, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 15:36:22 +0900
Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote:
Also in that case, non-fast promotion is triggered. Since my patch
tries to remove non-fast promotion, it's intentional to prevent them
from doing that. But you think that we should not drop that because
there are still some users for that?
It would be good to ask around to folks maintaining HA solutions about
that change at least, as there could be a point in still letting
promotion to happen in this case, but switch silently to the fast
path.
FWIW, PAF relies on pg_ctl promote. No need for non-fast promotion.
AFAICT repmgr uses 'pg_ctl promote', and has since version 3.0
(released
in mid 2015). It was only 3.3.2 (mid 2017) that supported Postgres
10,
so it seems fairly safe to assume that the removal won't be a problem.
Correct, repmgr uses "pg_ctl promote" or pg_promote() (if available),
and
won't be affected by this change.
For the record, the pgsql resource agent uses "pg_ctl promote" and
working with fast-promote. Auxiliary tools for it is assuming
fast-promote.
Thanks all for checking whether the change affects each HA solution!
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION
