X-Original-To: pgsql-docs-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B03411F8905 for ; Sun, 16 Apr 2006 05:22:10 -0300 (ADT) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Score: 0.032 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.032 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.032] Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id X0HABuGx9Wlb for ; Sun, 16 Apr 2006 05:22:06 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.239]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F6BE11F88C9 for ; Sun, 16 Apr 2006 05:22:08 -0300 (ADT) Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i2so120649wra for ; Sun, 16 Apr 2006 01:22:08 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=KJPTckmHx6wm6YAJcgdKAGd6he2VgKMGvwvDlzG7K9FNb6Th2LDd2lo7NF3xj+OnzSektbBbzVLrsZUu2x5xgjI7W4qfN+xT+MmELD5agB8xUk09eyWK5a44pL70dyHhnXPH7/EKzJkZeoODI2zIfbyUxAvh9tGKbHAaYLesqH4= Received: by 10.54.120.19 with SMTP id s19mr2945134wrc; Sun, 16 Apr 2006 01:22:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.92.7 with HTTP; Sun, 16 Apr 2006 01:22:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 03:22:08 -0500 From: "Jaime Casanova" To: "Tom Lane" Subject: Re: Proposed doc-patch: Identifying the Current WAL file Cc: "Bruce Momjian" , "Jeff Frost" , "Richard Huxton" , pgsql-docs@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <20681.1145127005@sss.pgh.pa.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <200604151809.k3FI96M06462@candle.pha.pa.us> <20681.1145127005@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Archive-Number: 200604/23 X-Sequence-Number: 3522 On 4/15/06, Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian writes: > > The point is that the test does not have a > > one-second window of showing the wrong answer, meaning I could wait for > > 60 seconds, and still see the wrong WAL file at the top. > > Oh, I see your point: you can lose at most one second's worth of data, > but that second could be arbitrarily long ago if it was the latest > activity in the database. Yeah, that's a bit unpleasant. So we really > do need both parts of the ordering rule, and there seems no way to do > that with just 'ls'. > > I wonder if you could do anything with find(1)'s -newer switch? > It seems to be a '>' condition not a '>=3D' condition, so it'd be > pretty awkward ... certainly not a one-liner. > > I think everyone agrees that adding a SQL function would be a reasonable > thing to do, anyway. > > regards, tom lane > specially for those using windows that hadn't those wonderfull tools... :) -- regards, Jaime Casanova "What they (MySQL) lose in usability, they gain back in benchmarks, and tha= t's all that matters: getting the wrong answer really fast." Randal L. Schwartz