Received: from makus.postgresql.org (makus.postgresql.org [98.129.198.125]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 527FBDDBC27 for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 04:59:23 -0400 (AST) Received: from exprod7og127.obsmtp.com ([64.18.2.210]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RWOxn-0008Ot-5S for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Fri, 02 Dec 2011 08:59:24 +0000 Received: from mail-bw0-f51.google.com ([209.85.214.51]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob127.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKTtiTXfwpy7KGhotJDtW7JWkQOlnZTCtX@postini.com; Fri, 02 Dec 2011 00:59:22 PST Received: by mail-bw0-f51.google.com with SMTP id jk13so1594355bkc.24 for ; Fri, 02 Dec 2011 00:59:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.180.92.41 with SMTP id cj9mr7726961wib.21.1322816349219; Fri, 02 Dec 2011 00:59:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.100] (dsl-hkibrasgw2-ff6cc300-200.dhcp.inet.fi. [88.195.108.200]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d17sm9292274wbh.19.2011.12.02.00.59.05 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 02 Dec 2011 00:59:06 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4ED89355.90006@enterprisedb.com> Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2011 10:59:01 +0200 From: Heikki Linnakangas User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; fi-FI; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20111010 Icedove/3.1.15 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Fujii Masao CC: Simon Riggs , Florian Pflug , Tom Lane , PostgreSQL-development Subject: Re: bug of recovery? References: <889.1317069556@sss.pgh.pa.us> <4E816650.80607@enterprisedb.com> <4E896276.7020209@enterprisedb.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Pg-Spam-Score: -4.2 (----) X-Archive-Number: 201112/64 X-Sequence-Number: 199316 On 04.10.2011 09:43, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: >>> I don't think this should use the rm_safe_restartpoint machinery. As you >>> said, it's not tied to any specific resource manager. And I've actually been >>> thinking that we will get rid of rm_safe_restartpoint altogether in the >>> future. The two things that still use it are the b-tree and gin, and I'd >>> like to change both of those to not require any post-recovery cleanup step >>> to finish multi-page operations, similar to what I did with GiST in 9.1. >> >> I thought that was quite neat doing it that way, but there's no >> specific reason to do it that way I guess. If you're happy to rewrite >> the patch then I guess we're OK. >> >> I certainly would like to get rid of rm_safe_restartpoint in the >> longer term, hopefully sooner. > > Though Heikki might be already working on that,... Just haven't gotten around to it. It's a fair amount of work with little user-visible benefit. > anyway, > the attached patch is the version which doesn't use rm_safe_restartpoint > machinery. Thanks, committed. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com