| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Basic Recovery Control functions for use in Hot Standby. Pause, |
| Date: | 2011-03-23 15:19:25 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTi=jCTGC+Qxfkum6EXcw8q4tRFd2KHNpe+4HYUeS@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 9:38 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> Actually, my previous email was all nonsense, wasn't it? If we don't
>> reach the consistency point, we can't enter normal running anyway -
>> shut down is the only option no matter what.
>
> Presumably you mean that the way its currently coded is the way it should stay?
Uh, maybe, but it's not obvious to me that it actually is coded that
way. I don't see any safeguard that prevents recovery from pausing
before consistency is released. Is there one? Where?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-03-23 15:24:30 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Efficient transaction-controlled synchronous replication. |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2011-03-23 13:38:50 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Basic Recovery Control functions for use in Hot Standby. Pause, |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-03-23 15:24:30 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Efficient transaction-controlled synchronous replication. |
| Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2011-03-23 14:56:44 | Re: crash-safe visibility map, take four |