Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

RE: Proposed WAL changes

From: "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: RE: Proposed WAL changes
Date: 2001-03-06 14:55:35
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane
> I have just sent to the pgsql-patches list a rather large set of
> proposed diffs for the WAL code.  These changes:
> * Store two past checkpoint locations, not just one, in pg_control.
>   On startup, we fall back to the older checkpoint if the newer one
>   is unreadable.  Also, a physical copy of the newest checkpoint record
>   is kept in pg_control for possible use in disaster recovery (ie,
>   complete loss of pg_xlog).  Also add a version number for pg_control
>   itself.  Remove archdir from pg_control; it ought to be a GUC
>   parameter, not a special case (not that it's implemented yet anyway).

Is archdir really a GUC parameter ?

Hiroshi Inoue 

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Thomas LockhartDate: 2001-03-06 15:07:18
Subject: Re: CORBA and PG
Previous:From: domDate: 2001-03-06 12:30:06
Subject: Re: How to shoot yourself in the foot: kill -9 postmaster

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group