Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakan...@vmware.com> writes:
> On 13.02.2013 21:21, Tom Lane wrote:
>> It would only be broken if someone interrupted a crash recovery
>> mid-flight and tried to establish a recovery stop point before the end
>> of WAL, no? Why don't we just forbid that case? This would either be
>> the same as, or a small extension of, the pg_control state vs existence
>> of recovery.conf error check that was just discussed.
> The problem is when you interrupt archive recovery (kill -9), and
> restart. After restart, the system needs to know how far the WAL was
> replayed before the crash, because it must not open for hot standby
> queries, or allow the database to be started up in master-mode, until
> it's replayed the WAL up to that same point again.
Well, archive recovery is a different scenario --- Simon was questioning
whether we need a minRecoveryPoint mechanism in crash recovery, or at
least that's what I thought he asked.
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
