On 01/07/2015 01:54 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I also think it's a great idea. But I think we should consider the name carefully. pg_resync might be a better name. Strictly, you might not be quite rewinding, AIUI.
pg_resync sounds too generic. It's true that if the source server has changes of its own, then it's more of a sideways movement than rewinding, but I think it's nevertheless a good name.
It does always rewind the control file, so that after startup, WAL replay begins from the last common point in history between the servers. WAL replay will catch up with the source server, which might be ahead of last common point, but strictly speaking pg_rewind is not involved at that point anymore.
- Heikki -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
