| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org |
| Cc: | "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Theory about XLogFlush startup failures |
| Date: | 2002-01-27 03:53:52 |
| Message-ID: | 25644.1012103632@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org> writes:
> If so, we should consider supporting some sort of error
> state that prevents further damage.
This seems reasonable (though I'd still question whether a bad LSN is
sufficient reason to force the whole database into read-only mode).
> Vadim's solution uses the only
> current mechanism available, which is to force the database to shut down
> until it can be evaluated.
But one of the big problems with his solution is that it gets in the way
of evaluating the problem. A read-only mode seems like a better way.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2002-01-27 05:49:28 | PostgreSQL v7.2rc2 Released |
| Previous Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2002-01-27 01:16:45 | Re: Theory about XLogFlush startup failures |