Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg(at)aon(dot)at> writes:
>>> [...] Is it sufficient to
>>> remember just the relation and the block number or do we need the
>>> contents a well?
> I meant the contents of the WAL record, not the original block
> contents. Anyway, I think it's not needed.
Oh, I see. Yes, it might be worth hanging onto for debugging purposes.
If we did get a report of such a failure, I'm sure we'd wish to know
what sort of WAL record triggered it. One trusts there won't be so many
that storing 'em all is a problem ...
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Oliver Jowett||Date: 2005-05-26 23:14:37|
|Subject: Re: Implement support for TCP_KEEPCNT, TCP_KEEPIDLE, TCP_KEEPINTVL|
|Previous:||From: Manfred Koizar||Date: 2005-05-26 22:04:52|
|Subject: Re: WAL replay failure after file truncation(?) |