"Mikheev, Vadim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Maybe now, with two checkpoints in log, we should start redo from
> oldest one? This will increase recovery time of course -:(
Yeah, and it doesn't even solve the problem: consider a crash just
after we've written a shutdown checkpoint record. On restart,
we won't think we need to redo anything at all.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- [HACKERS] RE: xlog checkpoint depends on sync() ... seem... Mikheev, Vadim
- Re: [HACKERS] RE: xlog checkpoint depends on sync()... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] RE: xlog checkpoint depends on sync()... Dominic J. Eidson
- RE: [HACKERS] RE: xlog checkpoint depends on sync()... Mikheev, Vadim
- Re: [HACKERS] RE: xlog checkpoint depends on sy... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] RE: xlog checkpoint depends o... Doug McNaught
- Re: [HACKERS] RE: xlog checkpoint depends o... Giles Lean
- Re: [HACKERS] RE: xlog checkpoint depends o... Matthew Kirkwood
