On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 11:13 AM Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 8:36 PM Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 05:08:56PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > > > But one question is; shouldn't we follow "usual" way to retire the > > > feature instead of dropping that immediately? That is, mark > > > pg_standby as obsolete, announce that pg_standby will be dropped > > > after several releases, and then drop pg_standby. This seems safe > > > because there might be some users. While it's been marked as > > > obsolete, maybe WAL prefetch feature doesn't work with pg_standby, > > > but we can live with that because it's obsolete. > > > > Thanks. FWIW, at this stage, my take is just to move on and remove > > it. If we mark that as obsolete, it will stay around forever while > > annoying future development. > > I agree. Also, this thing is entirely separate from the server, so a > hypothetical user who really wants to upgrade to 14 but keep using > pg_standby a bit longer could always use the version that shipped with > 13.
And, pushed.
