Mikheev, Vadim wrote:
> > I have verified that killing the postmaster after a few nextval's
> > leaves things in a bad state after restart.
> > I think I see the problem: in nextval(), the sequence data written to
> > the WAL log is different from that written to the data page. Isn't
> > that bogus?
> It was made to avoid WAL-loging on each nextval call, ie it should work
> like OID pre-fetching: value stored in WAL must always "exceed" values
> returned by nextval so on the after-crash-restart sequence should be
> advanced to value which was never returned by nextval (for non-cycled
> sequences). Maybe I made some mistakes in implementation?
Was this ever fixed?
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
In response to
pgsql-bugs by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2002-01-03 08:13:38|
|Subject: Re: Bug #548: Misleading documentation of `palloc'|
|Previous:||From: Dmitry Fomichev||Date: 2002-01-03 01:29:03|
|Subject: Refcursor problem|