Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com> writes: > On 08.12.2011 08:20, Tom Lane wrote: >> So this is really a whole lot worse than our behavior was in pre-FSM >> days, and it needs to get fixed.
> This bug was actually introduced only recently. Notice how the log says > "consistent recovery state reached at 0/5D71BA8". This interacts badly > with Fujii's patch I committed last week: You're right, I was testing on HEAD not 9.1.x. > That was harmless until last week, because reachedMinRecoveryPoint was > not used for anything unless you're doing archive recovery and hot > standby was enabled, but IMO the "consistent recovery state reached" log > message was misleading even then. I propose that we apply the attached > patch to master and backbranches. Looks sane to me, though I've not tested to see what effect it has on the case I was testing. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers