| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Guillaume Smet <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Clean shutdown and warm standby |
| Date: | 2009-04-28 14:16:31 |
| Message-ID: | 2344.1240928191@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> Andreas Pflug wrote:
>> So to get this down to a solution, it appears to be correct to execute
>> the RequestXLogSwitch right before CreateCheckPoint?
> Hmm, then the checkpoint record isn't archived. That might be
> acceptable, though, since all data would be safe in the preceding WAL.
Not at all, because the database would be very unhappy at restart
if it can't find the checkpoint record pg_control is pointing to.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-04-28 14:34:18 | Re: Extra cost of "lossy mode" Bitmap Scan plan |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2009-04-28 14:02:25 | Re: Extra cost of "lossy mode" Bitmap Scan plan |