On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 10:16 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 1:26 PM, Ivan Kartyshov > <i.kartys...@postgrespro.ru> wrote: >> Hello. I made some bugfixes and rewrite the patch. > > I don't think it's a good idea to deliberately leave the state of the > standby different from the state of the master on the theory that it > won't matter. I feel like that's something that's likely to come back > to bite us.
I agree with Robert. What happen if we intentionally don't apply the truncation WAL and switched over? If we insert a tuple on the new master server to a block that has been truncated on the old master, the WAL apply on the new standby will fail? I guess there are such corner cases causing failures of WAL replay after switch-over. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada 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
