On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 08:29 -0700, David Fetter wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 03:43:54PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 07:31 -0700, David Fetter wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 12:49:44PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 11:29 +0100, Heikki Lin****angas wrote:
> > > > > This could be implemented by a "pass-through" restore_command,
> > > > > that calls pg_standby, and does the custom action when
> > > > > pg_standby returns successfully.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, that's the preferred route for most cases.
> > > >
> > > > pg_standby was designed to be customisable, so if it works for
> > > > Chris, thats OK.
> > > >
> > > > After some mulling on this, I'm not sure we need to include this
> > > > in pg_standby however. If we did we'd end up having before/after
> > > > commands and retry options etc.
> > >
> > > Would those be good things to have as a whole package?
> >
> > I think the answer is we already do. It's called bash.
>
> Just a stray thought...bash doesn't run very well on common Windows
> installations.
True, but you can run anything you choose...
--
Simon Riggs
2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
--
Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list (pgsql-patches@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-patches
|
