Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> That's definitely sucky, but in some ways it would be more complicated
> if they did, because I don't think all-visible on the master implies
> all-visible on the standby.
Ouch. That seems like it could shoot down all these proposals. There
definitely isn't any way to make VM crash-safe if there is no WAL-driven
mechanism for setting the bits.
I guess what we need is a way to delay the application of such a WAL
record on the slave until it's safe, which means the record also has to
carry some indication of the youngest XMIN on the page.
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2010-11-30 16:47:40|
|Subject: Re: crash-safe visibility map, take three|
|Previous:||From: Greg Smith||Date: 2010-11-30 16:38:13|
|Subject: Re: Instrument checkpoint sync calls|