On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 3:29 AM, Leonardo Francalanci <m_li...@yahoo.it> wrote: >> I'm pretty sure we wouldn't accept a patch for a feature that would >> only work with wal_level=minimal, but it might be a useful starting >> point for someone else to keep hacking on. > > I understand. > > Reading your post at > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2011-01/msg00315.php > I thought I got the part: > > "what happens if we *crash* without writing an abort record? It > seems like that could leave a stray file around on a standby, > because the current code only cleans things up on the standby > at the start of recovery" > > But re-reading it, I don't understand: what's the difference in creating > a new "regular" table and crashing before emitting the abort record, > and converting an unlogged table to logged and crashing before > emitting the abort record? How do the standby servers handle a > "CREATE TABLE" followed by a ROLLBACK if the master crashes > before writing the abort record? I thought that too would "leave a > stray file around on a standby".
I've been thinking about the same thing. And AFAICS, your analysis is correct, though there may be some angle to it I'm not seeing. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
