Re: [PATCHES] Infrastructure changes for recovery

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Infrastructure changes for recovery
Date: 2008-10-02 23:07:55
Message-ID: 48E5544B.5050103@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 18:28 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
>>
>>> Version 7
>>>
>> After reading this for awhile, I realized that there is a rather
>> fundamental problem with it: it switches into "consistent recovery"
>> mode as soon as it's read WAL beyond ControlFile->minRecoveryPoint.
>>
>
> Just seen this patch has been bounced into November CommitFest, even
> though the new patch fixes all of the concerns raised.
>
> I'm concerned that this is going to make the final Hot Standby patch
> fairly large, which will make it even harder to review, test and
> generally get accepted.
>
> What's the best way to make this easier for you/others to review?
>
>

The fact that it's been put on the November list doesn't mean it can't
be reviewed and committed before then.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2008-10-03 03:42:03 parallel restore test results
Previous Message Decibel! 2008-10-02 22:56:16 Re: Block-level CRC checks

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2008-10-05 18:51:10 Re: Subtransaction commits and Hot Standby
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2008-10-02 22:11:28 Re: [PATCHES] Infrastructure changes for recovery