On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 00:43:48 +0000, Greg Stark <gsst...@mit.edu> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 11:56 PM, Greg Smith <g...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> This is also the reason why the whole "pause recovery" idea is a >> fruitless >> path to wander down. The whole point of this feature is that people >> have a >> secondary server available for high-availability, *first and foremost*, >> but >> they'd like it to do something more interesting that leave it idle all >> the >> time. The idea that you can hold off on applying standby updates for >> long >> enough to run seriously long reports is completely at odds with the idea >> of >> high-availability.
> I want my ability to run large batch queries without any performance > or reliability impact on the primary server. +1 I can use any number of other technologies for high availability. Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake(at)jabber(dot)postgresql(dot)org Consulting, Development, Support, Training 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997 -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
