On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 07:07 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 4:21 AM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > On Sat, 2010-04-10 at 09:02 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > > > >> So this can fail in either of two ways > > > > If I understand this correctly, it is unconvincing as a failure mode > > since it doesn't follow any of the documented procedures for creating a > > standby. There are many ways to screw up that ignore the manual, which > > is why the manual exists. > > > > If you can show a full test case, with failure, then I'll follow it > > through. > > Huh? If I had done everything correctly, of course I wouldn't have > gotten an error message at all. Surely the point is that if I do > something wrong, I should get an error message that describes what I > actually did wrong rather than an error message telling me that I did > something wrong which I clearly did not do.
I will change the error message. > The recent patch to allow starting from a shutdown checkpoint means > that a standby can be created by shutting down the master and taking a > filesystem-level snapshot of the cluster directly, creating > recovery.conf, and firing it up again. Anyone who does that with the > default postgresql.conf, though, is going to get a message telling > them that they need to change a setting which is already set > correctly. Why would they do that? I would never claim this supports all use cases, just the sensible ones. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
