X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5FEED1B289 for ; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 21:02:40 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 39755-06 for ; Fri, 16 Jul 2004 00:02:39 +0000 (GMT) Received: from cmailm3.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailm3.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.19]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ED67D1B266 for ; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 21:02:35 -0300 (ADT) Received: from modem-438.llama.dialup.pol.co.uk ([217.135.177.182] helo=[192.168.0.100]) by cmailm3.svr.pol.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1BlGBS-0002QU-Jp; Fri, 16 Jul 2004 01:02:38 +0100 Subject: Re: Point in Time Recovery From: Simon Riggs To: Mark Kirkwood Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <40F7176E.4000001@coretech.co.nz> References: <200407141555.i6EFtnk22984@mail.osdl.org> <1089833620.17493.4624.camel@stromboli> <40F5E14A.4090003@coretech.co.nz> <1089875702.17493.5539.camel@stromboli> <40F652C6.4070007@coretech.co.nz> <1089930315.17493.6696.camel@stromboli> <40F7176E.4000001@coretech.co.nz> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: 2nd Quadrant Message-Id: <1089936157.17493.6958.camel@stromboli> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 (1.4.5-7) Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 01:02:38 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 tagged_above=0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_SORBS X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200407/838 X-Sequence-Number: 56399 On Fri, 2004-07-16 at 00:46, Mark Kirkwood wrote: > > By way of contrast, using the *same* procedure (1-11), but generating 2 > logs worth of INSERTS/UPDATES using 10 concurrent process *works fine* - > e.g : > Great...at least we have shown that something works (or can work) and have begun to isolate the problem whatever it is. Best Regards, Simon Riggs