Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Infrastructure changes for recovery

2008-09-18 Thread Simon Riggs
On Thu, 2008-09-18 at 10:09 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Thu, 2008-09-18 at 09:06 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Do we really need a checkpoint there at all? > > > "Timelines only change at shutdown checkpoints". > > Hmm. I *think* that that is just a deb

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Infrastructure changes for recovery

2008-09-18 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, 2008-09-18 at 09:06 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Do we really need a checkpoint there at all? > "Timelines only change at shutdown checkpoints". Hmm. I *think* that that is just a debugging crosscheck rather than a critical property. But yeah, it w

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Infrastructure changes for recovery

2008-09-18 Thread Simon Riggs
On Thu, 2008-09-18 at 09:06 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Having some trouble trying to get a clean state change from recovery to > > normal mode. > > > Startup needs to be able to write WAL at the end of recovery so it can > > write a ShutdownCheckpoint, ye

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Infrastructure changes for recovery

2008-09-18 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Having some trouble trying to get a clean state change from recovery to > normal mode. > Startup needs to be able to write WAL at the end of recovery so it can > write a ShutdownCheckpoint, yet must not be allowed to write WAL before > that. Other services

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Infrastructure changes for recovery

2008-09-18 Thread Simon Riggs
On Thu, 2008-09-18 at 09:05 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote: > Feels like I should shutdown the bgwriter after recovery and then > allow it to be cranked up again after normal processing starts, and do > all of this through postmaster state changes. That way bgwriter > doesn't need to do a dynamic state

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Infrastructure changes for recovery

2008-09-18 Thread Simon Riggs
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 15:45 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Testing takes a while on this, I probably won't complete it until > > Friday. So enclosed patch is for eyeballs only at this stage. > > What's the status on that patch? Having some trouble trying to g