| From: | spock(at)mgnet(dot)de |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Point in Time Recovery |
| Date: | 2004-07-08 06:57:49 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.58.0407080852370.18718@spock.intra.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 8 Jul 2004, Simon Riggs wrote:
> We don't need to mention timelines in the docs, nor do we need to alter
> pg_controldata to display it...just a comment in the code to explain why
> we add a large number to the LogId after each recovery completes.
I'd disagree on that. Knowing what exactly happens when recovering the
database is a must. It makes people feel more safe about the process. This
is because the software doesn't do things you wouldn't expect.
On Oracle e.g. you create a new database incarnation when you recover a
database (incomplete). Which means your System Change Number and your Log
Sequence is reset to 0.
Knowing this is crucial because you otherwise would wonder "Why is it
doing that? Is this a bug or a feature?"
Just my 2ct :-))
Greetings, Klaus
--
Full Name : Klaus Naumann | (http://www.mgnet.de/) (Germany)
Phone / FAX : ++49/177/7862964 | E-Mail: (kn(at)mgnet(dot)de)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Karel Zak | 2004-07-08 07:13:30 | windows encodings |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2004-07-08 00:17:47 | Re: Point in Time Recovery |