Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CBEC37BDD7 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 2008 20:08:11 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 17615-08 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 2008 20:08:08 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from alexis.jtlnet.com (alexis.jtlnet.com [69.36.9.81]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D949337BDAA for ; Thu, 2 Oct 2008 20:08:08 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [192.168.10.103] (cpe-075-177-179-038.nc.res.rr.com [::ffff:75.177.179.38]) (TLS: TLSv1/SSLv3,256bits,AES256-SHA) by alexis.jtlnet.com with esmtp; Thu, 02 Oct 2008 19:06:37 -0400 id 00080607.48E553FD.00001A7B Message-ID: <48E5544B.5050103@dunslane.net> Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2008 19:07:55 -0400 From: Andrew Dunstan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.8.0.12) Gecko/20071019 Fedora/1.0.9-3.fc6 pango-text SeaMonkey/1.0.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Simon Riggs CC: Tom Lane , pgsql-hackers Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Infrastructure changes for recovery References: <1218109459.4549.423.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> <1220213074.4371.173.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> <1905.1220895241@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1221080797.3913.768.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> <15776.1221594318@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1221725145.3913.2315.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> <16992.1221743196@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1221745847.3913.2408.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> <18549.1221746983@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1222121161.4445.248.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> <1222184541.4445.400.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> <28973.1222381719@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1222985488.4445.1625.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> In-Reply-To: <1222985488.4445.1625.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200810/151 X-Sequence-Number: 125168 Simon Riggs wrote: > On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 18:28 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Simon Riggs writes: >> >>> Version 7 >>> >> After reading this for awhile, I realized that there is a rather >> fundamental problem with it: it switches into "consistent recovery" >> mode as soon as it's read WAL beyond ControlFile->minRecoveryPoint. >> > > Just seen this patch has been bounced into November CommitFest, even > though the new patch fixes all of the concerns raised. > > I'm concerned that this is going to make the final Hot Standby patch > fairly large, which will make it even harder to review, test and > generally get accepted. > > What's the best way to make this easier for you/others to review? > > The fact that it's been put on the November list doesn't mean it can't be reviewed and committed before then. cheers andrew