Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
>> On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 12:43 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> What about "revert the patch"?
>> That's probably just as dangerous.
> I don't feel comfortable either reverting such a big patch at last
Yeah, I'm not very happy with that either. However, I've still got no
confidence in anything proposed so far.
> I'm testing the attached patch at the moment. It's the same as the
> previous one, with the elog() in mdsync() issue fixed.
This seems like a kluge on top of a hack. Can't we have the bgwriter
do the final checkpoint instead?
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-bugs by date
|Next:||From: Simon Riggs||Date: 2009-06-25 17:55:09|
|Subject: Re: BUG #4879: bgwriter fails to fsync the file in recoverymode|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2009-06-25 17:25:22|
|Subject: Re: BUG #4879: bgwriter fails to fsync the file in recovery mode |