| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Hot Standby on git |
| Date: | 2009-10-02 08:26:18 |
| Message-ID: | 4AC5B92A.7090508@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-10-02 at 10:43 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>
>> It seems dangerous to write a WAL record after the shutdown checkpoint.
>> It will be overwritten by subsequent startup, which is a recipe for trouble.
>
> I've said its a corner case and not worth spending time on. I'm putting
> it in at your request. If it's not correct before and not correct after,
> where exactly do you want it?
I don't know. Perhaps it should go between the REDO pointer of the
shutdown checkpoint and the checkpoint record itself. Or maybe the
information should be included in the checkpoint record itself.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2009-10-02 08:29:48 | Re: Issues for named/mixed function notation patch |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2009-10-02 08:07:54 | Re: Hot Standby on git |