On Tue, 2010-04-27 at 20:13 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > On Tue, 2010-04-27 at 18:08 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Huh? How is a filter as coarse as an oldest-running-XID filter going > >> to prevent that? And aren't we initializing from trustworthy data in > >> ProcArrayApplyRecoveryInfo, anyway? > >> > >> I still say it's useless. > > > Quite possibly. Your looking at other code outside of this patch. I'm > > happy that you do so, but is it immediately related? I can have another > > look when we finish this. > > Well, it's nearby anyway. I've committed the present patch (with a > number of fixes). While I was looking at it I came across several > things in the existing code that I think are either wrong or at least > inadequately documented --- the above complaint is just the tip of the > iceberg. I'm going to make another pass over it to see if I'm just > missing things, and then report back.
Thank you for your input and changes. You're welcome to share my iceberg. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
