On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 1:28 AM, Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hmm, it seems this is my night to rediscover the wisdom of your >> previous proposals. I think that state would only be appropriate when >> we shutdown after reaching consistency, not any shutdown during >> recovery. Do you agree? > > No. When shutdown happens before reaching consistency, the database might > be inconsistent, but which doesn't mean that some data might be corrupted. > We can get consistent (not corrupted) database by applying the WAL records > to inconsistent one. > >> HINT: If this has occurred more than once some data might be >> corrupted and you might need to choose an earlier recovery target. > > I think that the hint message indicates the data corruption which prevents > recovery from completing, rather than the inconsistency of the database.
Hmm, OK, I think that makes sense. Would you care to propose a patch? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
