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.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Andrew Dunstan||Date: 2008-10-03 03:42:03|
|Subject: parallel restore test results|
|Previous:||From: Decibel!||Date: 2008-10-02 22:56:16|
|Subject: Re: Block-level CRC checks|
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Alvaro Herrera||Date: 2008-10-05 18:51:10|
|Subject: Re: Subtransaction commits and Hot Standby|
|Previous:||From: Simon Riggs||Date: 2008-10-02 22:11:28|
|Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Infrastructure changes for recovery|