On Tue, 2010-04-13 at 17:18 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> I've reviewed your changes and they look correct to me; the main chunk
> > of code is mine and that was tested by me.
>
> Ok, committed after fixing an obsoleted comment & other small
> editorialization.
Looks good, thanks.
--
Simo
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-04-08 at 19:02 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> Simon Riggs wrote:
>>> OK, that seems better. I'm happy with that instead.
>>>
>>> Have you tested this? Is it ready to commit?
>> Only very briefly. I think the code is ready, but please review and test
>> to see
On Thu, 2010-04-08 at 19:02 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > OK, that seems better. I'm happy with that instead.
> >
> > Have you tested this? Is it ready to commit?
>
> Only very briefly. I think the code is ready, but please review and test
> to see I didn't miss anythi
Simon Riggs wrote:
> OK, that seems better. I'm happy with that instead.
>
> Have you tested this? Is it ready to commit?
Only very briefly. I think the code is ready, but please review and test
to see I didn't miss anything.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Thu, 2010-04-08 at 18:35 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>
> > So I have introduced the new mode ("snapshot mode") to enter hot
> standby
> > anyway. That avoids us having to screw around with the loop logic
> for
> > redo. I don't see any need to support the case of where we have no
> WAL
> >
Simon Riggs wrote:
> In StartupXlog() when we get to the point where we "Find the first
> record that logically follows the checkpoint", in the current code
> ReadRecord() loops forever, spitting out
> LOG: record with zero length at 0/C88
> ...
>
> That prevents us from going further down Sta
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 6:16 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> If standby_mode is enabled and there is no source of WAL, then we get a
> stream of messages saying
>
> LOG: record with zero length at 0/C88
> ...
>
> but most importantly we never get to the main recovery loop, so Hot
> Standby never gets
On Thu, 2010-04-08 at 13:33 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> > If standby_mode is enabled and there is no source of WAL, then we get a
> > stream of messages saying
> >
> > LOG: record with zero length at 0/C88
> > ...
> >
> > but most importantly we never get to the main recovery loop, s
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 10:22 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
>
>> Initial patch. I will be testing over next day. No commit before at
>> least midday on Wed 7 Apr.
>
> Various previous discussions sidelined a very important point: what
> exactly does it mean to "start recovery from
On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 10:22 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Initial patch. I will be testing over next day. No commit before at
> least midday on Wed 7 Apr.
Various previous discussions sidelined a very important point: what
exactly does it mean to "start recovery from a shutdown checkpoint"?
If sta
Initial patch. I will be testing over next day. No commit before at
least midday on Wed 7 Apr.
The existing call to PrescanPreparedTransactions() looks correct to me
but the comment is wrong. I will change that also, if we agree.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
diff --git a/src/ba
11 matches
Mail list logo
