From: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Cc: markw@osdl.org
Cc: kn@mgnet.de
Cc: pgsql-patches@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Point in Time Recovery
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 23:14:24 +0100
Message-ID: <1090275263.28049.378.camel@stromboli> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <23306.1090256164@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <200407191635.i6JGZ5A21033@candle.pha.pa.us>
<23306.1090256164@sss.pgh.pa.us>
On Mon, 2004-07-19 at 17:56, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I had second thoughts about that and didn't do it in the committed
> >> patch, though it's certainly still open for debate.
>
> > How are we handling a crash during recovery?
>
> Retry, perhaps. It doesn't seem any different from crash-during-recovery
> in the non-archived scenario ...
>
Well, a recovery is just re-applying already written logs at super
speed. We don't need to write WAL because we already wrote it once (and
that would really confuse the timeline issue).
I think if this was an issue, the solution would be to speed up recovery
since that would benefit us more than putting recovery-squared code in.
Just start over...
Best Regards, Simon Riggs
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Cc: simon@2ndquadrant.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, pgman@candle.pha.pa.us, markw@osdl.org, kn@mgnet.de, pgsql-patches@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Point in Time Recovery
In-Reply-To: <1090275263.28049.378.camel@stromboli>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox