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
