On Sat, 2009-01-31 at 22:32 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > If you poison your WAL archive with a XLOG_CRASH_RECOVERY record, > recovery will never be able to proceed over that point. There would have > to be a switch to ignore those records, at the very least.
Definitely in assert mode only. I'll do it as a test patch and keep it separate from main line. > You don't really need to do it with a new WAL record. You could just add > a GUC or recovery.conf option along the lines of recovery_target: > crash_target=0/123456, and check for that in ReadRecord or wherever you > want the crash to occur. Knowing that LSN is somewhat harder -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
