On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:42:03AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> wrote: >> > It would solve the problem, but it would mean resetting unlogged relations >> > on >> > the standby at every shutdown checkpoint. ?That's probably not a >> > performance >> > problem, but it is a hack. >> >> I haven't thought about this too deeply, but I'm not sure I agree >> that's a hack. Why do you think it is? > > It would make the standby reset unlogged relations on both regular shutdowns > and > crashes, while the master only does so on crashes. This creates no functional > hazard since unlogged relation contents are never accessible during hot > standby. > It seems like a hack to rely on that fact at any distance, but perhaps a > comment > is enough to assuage that.
I think I'd be more comfortable with that route if it seems like it'll work. Whacking around the recovery code always makes me a little nervous about bugs, since it's easy to fail to notice the problem until something Bad happens. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
