Re: [PATCHES] Infrastructure changes for recovery

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: List pgsql-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Infrastructure changes for recovery
Date: 2008-09-29 12:46:46
Message-ID: 10307.1222692406@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> ... That kinda works, but the problem is that restartpoints are time based,
> not log based. We need them to be deterministic for us to rely upon them
> in the above way.

Right, but the performance disadvantages of making them strictly
log-distance-based are pretty daunting. We don't really want slaves
doing that while they're in catchup mode.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Markus Wanner 2008-09-29 12:54:10 Re: Proposal: move column defaults into pg_attribute along with attacl
Previous Message Zdenek Kotala 2008-09-29 12:42:04 Re: [REVIEW] Prototype: In-place upgrade v02

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2008-09-29 13:53:28 Re: [PATCHES] Infrastructure changes for recovery
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2008-09-29 12:33:16 Re: [PATCHES] Infrastructure changes for recovery