Re: [BUG] Checkpointer on hot standby runs without looking checkpoint_segments

From: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [BUG] Checkpointer on hot standby runs without looking checkpoint_segments
Date: 2012-04-17 19:07:44
Message-ID: CAHGQGwHpfA7fEU4PR+AdrVdEMbhr90Y5=2qcuHr5A6KUtTRZ6A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
<horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> These seems quite reasonable. These conditions make following
> conditional expression.
>
>     restorePtr <= replayPtr <= receivePtr
>
> But XLByteLT(recievePtr, replayPtr) this should not return true
> under the condition above.. Something wrong in my assumption?

When walreceiver is not running, i.e., the startup process reads the WAL files
from the archival area, the replay location would get bigger than the
receive one.

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2012-04-17 19:15:27 Re: Last gasp
Previous Message Tom Lane 2012-04-17 19:05:52 Re: Parameterized-path cost comparisons need some work