| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Adrien Nayrat <adrien(dot)nayrat(at)dalibo(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Julien Rouhaud <julien(dot)rouhaud(at)dalibo(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: LSN as a recovery target |
| Date: | 2016-08-23 11:50:14 |
| Message-ID: | CAB7nPqSo5n2VNjivRiMC_4UKeJ7S4QJ23BS=rmKLLPXii8vq8Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 6:10 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 23 August 2016 at 09:39, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> Looks very reasonable to me (both patches). Thanks for doing that.
>>
>> I am inclined to mark this as ready for committer.
>
> Looking at it now.
>
> The messages for recovery_target_lsn don't mention after or before, as
> do other targets... e.g.
> recoveryStopAfter ? "after" : "before",
> My understanding is that if you request an LSN that isn't the exact
> end point of a WAL record then it will either stop before or after the
> requested point, so that needs to be described in the docs and in the
> messages generated prior to starting to search.
>
> Everything else looks in good order.
You are right, this message should be completed as such. Do you want
an updated patch?
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2016-08-23 12:10:35 | Re: Logical decoding of sequence advances, part II |
| Previous Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2016-08-23 11:02:29 | Block level parallel vacuum WIP |