Hi, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakan...@vmware.com> writes: > Attached is a patch to refactor that logic into a more straightforward state > machine. It's always been a kind of a state machine, but it's been hard to > see, as the code wasn't explicitly written that way. Any objections?
On a quick glance over, looks good to me. Making that code simpler to read and reason about seems a good goal. > This change should have no effect in normal restore scenarios. It'd only > make a difference if some files in the middle of the sequence of WAL files > are missing from the archive, but have been copied to pg_xlog manually, and > only if that file contains a timeline switch. Even then, I think I like the > new order better; it's easier to explain if nothing else. I'm not understanding the sequence difference well enough to comment here, but I think some people are currently playing tricks in their failover scripts with moving files directly to the pg_xlog of the server to be promoted. Is it possible for your refactoring to keep the old sequence? Regards, -- Dimitri Fontaine http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
