| From: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Make unlogged table resets detectable |
| Date: | 2021-06-08 04:52:23 |
| Message-ID: | 20210608045223.5msafdt3bgu6ahj6@nol |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 12:46:05PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 02:56:57PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > +1. I'd support recording the time of the last crash recovery, as
> > well as having a counter. I think an LSN would not be as useful
> > as a timestamp.
>
> One could guess a timestamp based on a LSN, no? So I'd like to think
> the opposite actually: a LSN would be more useful than a timestamp.
Wouldn't that work only if the LSN is recent enough, depending on the WAL
activity?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Etsuro Fujita | 2021-06-08 04:57:28 | Re: Asynchronous Append on postgres_fdw nodes. |
| Previous Message | Kyotaro Horiguchi | 2021-06-08 04:17:53 | Re: Duplicate history file? |