"Florian G. Pflug" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Conclusion: we should apply Florian's patch as-is in 8.2, do something
>> morally equivalent in 8.1 and before, and invent a
>> CrashRecoveryCheckpoint record type in HEAD.
> Sounds good.
Actually, now that I look closer, this patch seems completely wrong.
It's predicated on an assumption that rm_cleanup won't write WAL entries
describing what it did ... but, at least in the btree case, it does.
(I think gist/gin might not, but that's a bug in those AMs not in xlog.)
I'm therefore wondering what test case led you to think there was
something wrong.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(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
