X-Original-To: pgsql-patches-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D4BED1B1D5 for ; Wed, 21 Jul 2004 17:01:28 -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 21324-10 for ; Wed, 21 Jul 2004 20:01:19 +0000 (GMT) Received: from cmailm2.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailm2.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.210]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E8C8D1B1B3 for ; Wed, 21 Jul 2004 17:01:15 -0300 (ADT) Received: from modem-4055.lemur.dialup.pol.co.uk ([217.135.143.215] helo=[192.168.0.102]) by cmailm2.svr.pol.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1BnNH0-0000eg-Ji; Wed, 21 Jul 2004 21:01:06 +0100 Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Point in Time Recovery From: Simon Riggs To: Tom Lane Cc: Klaus Naumann , markw@osdl.org, pgman@candle.pha.pa.us, pgsql-patches@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <8659.1090421629@sss.pgh.pa.us> References: <200407201536.i6KFa7122392@mail.osdl.org> <1090344478.3377.8.camel@stromboli> <4589.1090388994@sss.pgh.pa.us> <8659.1090421629@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: 2nd Quadrant Message-Id: <1090439667.2658.1260.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 (1.4.6-2) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 21:00:49 +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: 200407/381 X-Sequence-Number: 12051 On Wed, 2004-07-21 at 15:53, Tom Lane wrote: > Klaus Naumann writes: > > Simon doesn't mean the recovery part. Instead he means the "normal" > > startup of the server. It has to be absolutely clear (in the logfile!) if > > the server was started in archive mode or not. Otherwise you always have > > to guess. > > Why would you guess? "SHOW archive_command" will tell you, without > question, at any time. I don't see the point of placing such a message > in the postmaster log --- in normal circumstances the postmaster will > still be running long after its starting messages have been discarded > due to log rotation. > > Also, the current implementation allows you to stop and start archiving > on-the-fly, so a start-time message would be an unreliable guide to what > the postmaster is actually doing at the moment. > Overall, this is a small point and I think we should leave Tom alone, to focus on the bigger issues that we care about. Tom has done an amazingly good job in the last few days of refactoring some reasonably ugly code on my part, all without a murmur. I relent on this to allow everything to be finished in time. The PITR journey has just begun, so there will be further opportunity to discuss and agree what constitutes real issues and then correct them. This may not be on that list later. Best Regards, Simon Riggs