Simon Riggs wrote: > On Fri, 2009-10-02 at 10:43 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > >> It seems dangerous to write a WAL record after the shutdown checkpoint. >> It will be overwritten by subsequent startup, which is a recipe for trouble. > > I've said its a corner case and not worth spending time on. I'm putting > it in at your request. If it's not correct before and not correct after, > where exactly do you want it?
I don't know. Perhaps it should go between the REDO pointer of the shutdown checkpoint and the checkpoint record itself. Or maybe the information should be included in the checkpoint record itself. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
