Oh, I am wrong!
"Jacky Leng" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> дÈëÓʼþ news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> дÈëÓʼþ > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > "Jacky Leng" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Cann't we remove this param? > > > > No. > > > > > We can rewrite like this: > > > 1.XLogReadBuffer: > > > * remove init; > > > * everytime we cann't read a block, just "log_invalid_page" it, and > return > > > InvalidBuffer; > > > > Your proposal degrades the robustness of the system by turning non-error > > cases into errors. If the caller is able to rewrite the page fully, we > > should not report an error when it's not available to read. > > Oh, I see, but how about my second question, is it possible? > If it happens: > 1. the second rel's pages' lsn surely is lager than xlog records of the > first rel; > 2. so it's possible some xlog record are not redoed; > 3. but those pages that can be rewrite fully are rewrited unconditionaly, > > If I do a PITR recovery now, is there any trouble?----The file contains both > old rels'data and new rel's. > > > Am I wrong? > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
