Mikheev, Vadim wrote:
> > I have verified that killing the postmaster after a few nextval's
> > leaves things in a bad state after restart.
> >
> > I think I see the problem: in nextval(), the sequence data written to
> > the WAL log is different from that written to the data page. Isn't
> > tha
> I have verified that killing the postmaster after a few nextval's
> leaves things in a bad state after restart.
>
> I think I see the problem: in nextval(), the sequence data written to
> the WAL log is different from that written to the data page. Isn't
> that bogus?
It was made to avoid WAL
No. I had fsync on.
- Stuart
-Original Message-
From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 19 December 2001 18:49
To: Mikheev, Vadim
Cc: Henshall, Stuart - WCP; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [BUGS] After ~Crash Sequence not correct
"Mikheev, Vadim" <[EMAIL PROTE
"Mikheev, Vadim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It was made to avoid WAL-loging on each nextval call, ie it should work
> like OID pre-fetching: value stored in WAL must always "exceed" values
> returned by nextval so on the after-crash-restart sequence should be
> advanced to value which was never
I have verified that killing the postmaster after a few nextval's
leaves things in a bad state after restart.
I think I see the problem: in nextval(), the sequence data written to
the WAL log is different from that written to the data page. Isn't
that bogus?
To WAL:
seq->last_va
"Henshall, Stuart - WCP" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Setup: PostgreSQL 7.1.2 on Dual PIII WinNT4 server + Cygwin 1.3.2
> PostgreSQL is run as a service and when rebooting (which doesn't shutdown -
> previously on cygwin list (hence the ~Crash in title)) I have twice noticed
> that a sequence was
Severity: Annoyance
Setup: PostgreSQL 7.1.2 on Dual PIII WinNT4 server + Cygwin 1.3.2
PostgreSQL is run as a service and when rebooting (which doesn't shutdown -
previously on cygwin list (hence the ~Crash in title)) I have twice noticed
that a sequence was not properly updated, however records wi
