Re: Did we really want to force an initdb in beta2?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Did we really want to force an initdb in beta2?
Date: 2010-06-04 18:30:29
Message-ID: 21283.1275676229@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> writes:
> On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 4:30 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> XLOG_PAGE_MAGIC --- bump on incompatible change in WAL contents

> How can I get that from an existing data directory? I don't see it in
> pg_controldata output (unless it has a non-obvious alias).

You'd need to pull it out of one of the WAL files. I'm not sure it's
worth the trouble ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dave Page 2010-06-04 18:43:20 Re: Did we really want to force an initdb in beta2?
Previous Message Dave Page 2010-06-04 18:28:04 Re: Did we really want to force an initdb in beta2?