| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Hot Standby on git |
| Date: | 2009-10-02 09:13:43 |
| Message-ID: | 1254474823.17864.326.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 2009-10-02 at 11:26 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Fri, 2009-10-02 at 10:43 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >
> >> It seems dangerous to write a WAL record after the shutdown checkpoint.
> >> It will be overwritten by subsequent startup, which is a recipe for trouble.
> >
> > I've said its a corner case and not worth spending time on. I'm putting
> > it in at your request. If it's not correct before and not correct after,
> > where exactly do you want it?
>
> I don't know. Perhaps it should go between the REDO pointer of the
> shutdown checkpoint and the checkpoint record itself.
That would seem minimally invasive approach and would appear to work for
both cases. Will do.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Petr Jelinek | 2009-10-02 09:42:00 | Re: [PATCH] DefaultACLs |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2009-10-02 08:29:48 | Re: Issues for named/mixed function notation patch |