Re: Why we really need timelines *now* in PITR

Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> I think we're heatedly agreeing again.

Yeah, I think so. I'll get started on this tomorrow.

> where the default is <notarget> and if you specify a target, the default
> target_in_timeline is <latest>.

I think actually the default target has to be the timeline ID found in
pg_control --- otherwise you get weird behavior in the plain crash
recovery, non-PITR case.

> I don't like the name target_in_timeline,

Agreed, but I don't have a better name offhand for it. The point I was
making is that we seem to be using "target" to mean a point-in-time
stopping target. But you might be interested in going to the end of
timeline N and so there's not a "target" in that sense. That's why I
was wanting to avoid using the term "target" for the desired timeline.
But maybe there's not a better word.

> ...we definitely need an offline-log inspection tool, don't we?
> Next month...

Yeah. When you get started, I have a toy tool I've been using for
awhile that might serve as a starting point. (I'm going to have to
whack it around for timelines so there's little point in attaching
it right now...)

regards, tom lane