Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Standalone backends run StartupXLOG in an incorrect environment

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Standalone backends run StartupXLOG in an incorrect environment
Date: 2010-04-19 16:09:37
Message-ID: t2j603c8f071004190909q17aaf66dwd83a7dd21874d779@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 9:32 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>>> OK,  I re-read it and still don't understand, but I don't have to.
>
>> I re-read it too and I don't understand either.
>
> The point is that a standalone backend will fail to execute recovery
> correctly:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-09/msg01297.php
> This is bad enough now but seems likely to be an even bigger foot-gun
> in an HS/SR world.

OK.

>> This is LISTED as an
>> open item for 9.0, but it is apparently not a new regression, so I
>> think we should move it to the Todo list instead.  This problem was
>> discovered six months ago, is not a new regression, and there is
>> apparently no movement toward a fix, so it doesn't make sense to me
>> that we should hold up either 9.0 beta or 9.0 final on account of it.
>
> If you think we're at the point where this item is the main thing
> standing between us and beta, I'll go do something about it.  I've
> been waiting for the HS code to settle before trying to design a
> solution...

I'm not sure if this is the main thing, but I think it's probably in the top 5.

At present there are 8 items (not counting documentation issues) listed at:

http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.0_Open_Items

...not all of which seem likely to get fixed, and probably 1-3
additional patches that are floating around out there without having
formally gotten added to the list.  I think it's realistic to think
that we could be within 10 commits of beta.

...Robert

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2010-04-19 16:24:21
Subject: Re: perltidy
Previous:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2010-04-19 16:05:39
Subject: Re: Standalone backends run StartupXLOG in an incorrect environment

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group