On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 12:19 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 9:38 AM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >>> Actually, my previous email was all nonsense, wasn't it? If we don't >>> reach the consistency point, we can't enter normal running anyway - >>> shut down is the only option no matter what. >> >> Presumably you mean that the way its currently coded is the way it should >> stay? > > Uh, maybe, but it's not obvious to me that it actually is coded that > way. I don't see any safeguard that prevents recovery from pausing > before consistency is released. Is there one? Where?
Oh, sorry for my poor explanation. My explanation is true if we'll just change the code so that it ignores pause_at_recovery_target until recovery reaches the consistency point. Simon changed the code in that way yesterday. Regards, -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
