| From: | Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)coretech(dot)co(dot)nz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PITR COPY Failure (was Point in Time Recovery) |
| Date: | 2004-07-22 00:39:59 |
| Message-ID: | 40FF0CDF.4070509@coretech.co.nz |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Looks good to me. Log file numbering scheme seems to have changed - is
that part of the fix too?.
Tom Lane wrote:
>
>This is done in CVS tip. Mark, could you retest to verify it's fixed?
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-07-22 00:43:07 | Re: PITR COPY Failure (was Point in Time Recovery) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-07-21 22:43:55 | Re: PITR COPY Failure (was Point in Time Recovery) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-07-22 00:40:19 | Re: Why we really need timelines *now* in PITR |
| Previous Message | Rod Taylor | 2004-07-22 00:39:17 | Re: check point segments leakage ? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-07-22 00:43:07 | Re: PITR COPY Failure (was Point in Time Recovery) |
| Previous Message | Steve Holdoway | 2004-07-22 00:29:11 | Re: Borland c++ compile problems... |