| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Avoiding shutdown checkpoint at failover |
| Date: | 2011-11-01 13:48:08 |
| Message-ID: | 24926.1320155288@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> The reason we run a shutdown checkpoint is to prevent needing to
> re-enter recovery if we crash after promotion.
That's *a* reason, it's not necessarily the only reason. This proposal
worries me, especially your blithe dismissal of the timeline issues;
but in any case I would not trust it without a detailed review of all
WAL replay activities, which you don't sound to have done.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-11-01 13:52:36 | Re: IDLE in transaction introspection |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2011-11-01 13:45:44 | Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf |