Re: [DOCS] [HACKERS] Docs for archive_cleanup_command are poor

2010-10-15 Thread Simon Riggs
On Thu, 2010-10-14 at 18:05 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Brendan Jurd writes: > > Agreed that there are no doc bugs. The reason I suggested a backpatch > > is that I'm concerned that a lot of people are going to be approaching > > the whole Standby topic for the first time with 9.0, so it would be >

Re: [HACKERS] Docs for archive_cleanup_command are poor

2010-10-14 Thread Tom Lane
Brendan Jurd writes: > Agreed that there are no doc bugs. The reason I suggested a backpatch > is that I'm concerned that a lot of people are going to be approaching > the whole Standby topic for the first time with 9.0, so it would be > nice to give those folks an accessible account of how > arc

Re: [HACKERS] Docs for archive_cleanup_command are poor

2010-10-14 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 2:33 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: > On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 02:24 +1100, Brendan Jurd wrote: > >> I'll drop this onto the next open commitfest.  If it passes muster, it >> sure wouldn't hurt to backpatch it to 9.0. > > Committed. Not sure there's anything there worth backpatching?

Re: [HACKERS] Docs for archive_cleanup_command are poor

2010-10-14 Thread Brendan Jurd
On 15 October 2010 05:33, Simon Riggs wrote: > On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 02:24 +1100, Brendan Jurd wrote: >> I'll drop this onto the next open commitfest.  If it passes muster, it >> sure wouldn't hurt to backpatch it to 9.0. > > Committed. Not sure there's anything there worth backpatching? There > a

Re: [HACKERS] Docs for archive_cleanup_command are poor

2010-10-14 Thread Simon Riggs
On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 02:24 +1100, Brendan Jurd wrote: > I'll drop this onto the next open commitfest. If it passes muster, it > sure wouldn't hurt to backpatch it to 9.0. Committed. Not sure there's anything there worth backpatching? There aren't any doc bugs there. -- Simon Riggs

Re: [HACKERS] Docs for archive_cleanup_command are poor

2010-10-14 Thread Brendan Jurd
On 12 October 2010 23:28, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 10:04 AM, Brendan Jurd wrote: >> I have just set up HS+SR for the first time, and for the most part, >> the docs were excellent.  The one exception for me was the discussion >> of archive_cleanup_command.  This is a pretty impo

Re: [DOCS] [HACKERS] Docs for archive_cleanup_command are poor

2010-10-14 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 8:28 AM, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 10:04 AM, Brendan Jurd wrote: >> Hi folks, >> >> I have just set up HS+SR for the first time, and for the most part, >> the docs were excellent.  The one exception for me was the discussion >> of archive_cleanup_command.

Re: [DOCS] [HACKERS] Docs for archive_cleanup_command are poor

2010-10-14 Thread Brendan Jurd
On 14 October 2010 08:45, Robert Haas wrote: > Is someone working on a patch? Yes, I will prepare a patch to get us started. Cheers, BJ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] Docs for archive_cleanup_command are poor

2010-10-12 Thread Fujii Masao
On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 10:04 AM, Brendan Jurd wrote: > Hi folks, > > I have just set up HS+SR for the first time, and for the most part, > the docs were excellent.  The one exception for me was the discussion > of archive_cleanup_command.  This is a pretty important part of > constructing a health

[HACKERS] Docs for archive_cleanup_command are poor

2010-10-08 Thread Brendan Jurd
Hi folks, I have just set up HS+SR for the first time, and for the most part, the docs were excellent. The one exception for me was the discussion of archive_cleanup_command. This is a pretty important part of constructing a healthy standby server, and IMO the docs don't give it the treatment it