On Monday, July 08, 2013 5:16 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2013-07-08 17:10:43 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Monday, July 08, 2013 4:26 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > > On 2013-07-08 16:17:54 +0530, Hari Babu wrote:
> > > > + This utility can also be used to decide whether backup is
> > > required or not when the data page
> > > > + in old-master precedes the last applied LSN in old-standby
> > > (i.e., new-master) at the
> > > > + moment of the failover.
> > > > + </para>
> > > > + </refsect1>
> > >
> > > I don't think this is safe in any interesting set of cases. Am I
> > > missing
> > > something?
> >
> > No, you are not missing anything. It can be only used to find max LSN
> in
> > database which can avoid further corruption
>
> Why is the patch submitted documenting it as a use-case then?
This is my mistake, I was not able to catch.
I am really sorry for it and in future will make sure such mistake doesn't
happen again
> I find it
> rather scary if the *patch authors* document a known unsafe use case as
> one of the known use-cases.
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
