Re: Forcing current WAL file to be archived

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Forcing current WAL file to be archived
Date: 2006-08-14 14:15:56
Message-ID: 1155564956.2649.30.camel@holly
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

On Sun, 2006-08-13 at 22:50 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > This issue is closed, right?
>
> We've agreed we need two functions, but it's not done yet. Seems pretty
> trivial though ...

Just back from India. I'll work on this tonight.

--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message dror 2006-08-14 14:45:23 [Patch] - Fix for bug #2558, InitDB failed to run on windows 2003
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-08-14 12:40:56 Re: Google SoC--Idea Request

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message dror 2006-08-14 14:45:23 [Patch] - Fix for bug #2558, InitDB failed to run on windows 2003
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-08-14 11:58:12 Re: pgstattuple extension for indexes