Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.208.211]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42B53633415 for ; Fri, 2 Oct 2009 05:26:36 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.211]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 63736-06 for ; Fri, 2 Oct 2009 08:26:21 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from exprod7og109.obsmtp.com (exprod7og109.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.171]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1100F633B78 for ; Fri, 2 Oct 2009 05:26:24 -0300 (ADT) Received: from source ([209.85.219.214]) by exprod7ob109.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKSsW5L5L9zI4bP13+EXKQCFtPnbZVHYsf@postini.com; Fri, 02 Oct 2009 01:26:25 PDT Received: by ewy10 with SMTP id 10so836760ewy.9 for ; Fri, 02 Oct 2009 01:26:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.211.132.3 with SMTP id j3mr9163983ebn.54.1254471982304; Fri, 02 Oct 2009 01:26:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.1.117? ([88.195.103.165]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 7sm212681eyg.43.2009.10.02.01.26.20 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 02 Oct 2009 01:26:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4AC5B92A.7090508@enterprisedb.com> Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 11:26:18 +0300 From: Heikki Linnakangas Organization: EnterpriseDB User-Agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090706) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Simon Riggs CC: pgsql-hackers Subject: Re: Hot Standby on git References: <1253958559.4449.833.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> <4AC2FBB9.7060304@enterprisedb.com> <1254408330.17864.233.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> <4AC4CF18.50309@enterprisedb.com> <1254413624.17864.243.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> <4AC5A60F.5050503@enterprisedb.com> <1254468966.17864.301.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> <4AC5AF36.3020900@enterprisedb.com> <1254470874.17864.309.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> In-Reply-To: <1254470874.17864.309.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.446 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=AWL=0.153, BAYES_00=-2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200910/143 X-Sequence-Number: 146955 Simon Riggs wrote: > On Fri, 2009-10-02 at 10:43 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > >> It seems dangerous to write a WAL record after the shutdown checkpoint. >> It will be overwritten by subsequent startup, which is a recipe for trouble. > > I've said its a corner case and not worth spending time on. I'm putting > it in at your request. If it's not correct before and not correct after, > where exactly do you want it? I don't know. Perhaps it should go between the REDO pointer of the shutdown checkpoint and the checkpoint record itself. Or maybe the information should be included in the checkpoint record itself. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com