| From: | "Jaime Casanova" <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: time-delayed standbys |
| Date: | 2011-07-01 03:32:48 |
| Message-ID: | 87fwmqy8tb.fsf@casanova1.SEINGALT |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 2:25 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Some actions aren't even transactional, such as DROP DATABASE, amongst
>>
>> Good point. We'd probably need to add a timestamp to the drop
>> database record, as that's a case that people would likely want to
>> defend against with this feature.
>
> This means that recovery_target_* code would also need to deal with
> DROP DATABASE case.
>
there is no problem if you use "restore point" names... but of course
you lose flexibility (ie: you can't restore to 5 minutes before now)
mmm... a lazy idea: can't we just create a restore point wal record
*before* we actually drop the database? then we won't need to modify
logic about recovery_target_* (if it is only DROP DATABASE maybe that's
enough about complicating code) and we can provide that protection since
9.1
--
Jaime Casanova www.2ndQuadrant.com
Professional PostgreSQL
Soporte 24x7, desarrollo, capacitación y servicios
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jun Ishiduka | 2011-07-01 05:04:27 | Re: Online base backup from the hot-standby |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2011-07-01 01:36:38 | Re: add support for logging current role (what to review?) |