| From: | Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Kevin Brown <kevin(at)sysexperts(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] WAL replay logic (was Re: Mount options for |
| Date: | 2003-02-15 08:29:21 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.NEB.4.51.0302151728380.361@angelic-vtfw.cvpn.cynic.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Is there a TODO here, like "Allow recovery from corrupt pg_control via
> WAL"?
Isn't that already in section 12.2.1 of the documentation?
Using pg_control to get the checkpoint position speeds up the
recovery process, but to handle possible corruption of pg_control,
we should actually implement the reading of existing log segments
in reverse order -- newest to oldest -- in order to find the last
checkpoint. This has not been implemented, yet.
cjs
--
Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net> +81 90 7737 2974 http://www.netbsd.org
Don't you know, in this new Dark Age, we're all light. --XTC
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Curt Sampson | 2003-02-15 08:36:39 | Re: [HACKERS] More benchmarking of wal_buffers |
| Previous Message | Curt Sampson | 2003-02-15 08:26:03 | Re: Incremental backup |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Curt Sampson | 2003-02-15 08:36:39 | Re: [HACKERS] More benchmarking of wal_buffers |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-02-15 00:11:52 | Re: [Gmod-schema] Re: performace problem after VACUUM ANALYZE |