On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 03:53:12PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> wrote: > > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:42:03AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > >> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> wrote: > >> > It would solve the problem, but it would mean resetting unlogged > >> > relations on > >> > the standby at every shutdown checkpoint. ?That's probably not a > >> > performance > >> > problem, but it is a hack. > >> > >> I haven't thought about this too deeply, but I'm not sure I agree > >> that's a hack. ?Why do you think it is? > > > > It would make the standby reset unlogged relations on both regular > > shutdowns and > > crashes, while the master only does so on crashes. ?This creates no > > functional > > hazard since unlogged relation contents are never accessible during hot > > standby. > > It seems like a hack to rely on that fact at any distance, but perhaps a > > comment > > is enough to assuage that. > > I think I'd be more comfortable with that route if it seems like it'll > work. Whacking around the recovery code always makes me a little > nervous about bugs, since it's easy to fail to notice the problem > until something Bad happens.
No remaining objection from me, then. Thanks for reviewing. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
