Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 16:31 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I thought the latest conclusion was that changing the behavior of
>> pg_standby itself wouldn't address the problem anyway, and that what we
>> need is just a docs patch recommending that people use safe copying
>> methods in their scripts that copy to the archive area?
> Plus the rest of this patch, which is really very simple.
Why? AFAICT the patch is just a kluge that adds user-visible complexity
without providing a solution that's actually sure to work.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
