Guillaume Smet wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Guillaume Smet
> <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
>> <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>>> At a normal startup, the checkpoint record would be there as usual. And an
>>> archive recovery starts at the location indicated by the backup label.
>>> AFAICS calling RequestXLogSwitch() before CreateCheckPoint would be
>>> equivalent to calling "pg_switch_xlog()" just before shutting down.
>> That's what I had in mind when writing the patch but I didn't know the
>> implications of this particular checkpoint.
>> So moving the call before CreateCheckPoint is what I really intended
>> now that I have in mind these implications and I don't know why it would be
>> a problem to miss this checkpoint in the logs archived.
> What do we decide about this problem?
> Should we just call RequestXLogSwitch() before the creation of the
> shutdown checkpoint or do we need a more complex patch? If so can
> anybody explain the potential problem of this approach so we can
> figure how to fix it?
I've committed a patch to do the RequstXLogSwitch() before shutdown
checkpoint as discussed. It seems safe to me. (sorry for the delay, and
thanks for the reminder)
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Michael Meskes||Date: 2009-05-28 11:33:47|
|Subject: Re: Compiler warning cleanup - unitilized constvariables, pointer type mismatch|
|Previous:||From: Itagaki Takahiro||Date: 2009-05-28 10:31:16|
|Subject: Re: BUG #4822: xmlattributes encodes '&' twice |