Re: Point in Time Recovery - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: Point in Time Recovery
Date
Msg-id 1089143927.17493.158.camel@stromboli
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Point in Time Recovery  ("Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA@spardat.at>)
Responses Re: Point in Time Recovery
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 2004-07-06 at 08:38, Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD wrote:
>  > - by time - but the time stamp on each xlog record only specifies to the
> > second, which could easily be 10 or more commits (we hope....)
> > 
> > Should we use a different datatype than time_t for the commit timestamp,
> > one that offers more fine grained differentiation between checkpoints?
> 
> Imho seconds is really sufficient. If you know a more precise position
> you will probably know it from backend log or an xlog sniffer. With those
> you can easily use the TransactionId way.
> 

OK, thanks. I'll just leave the time_t datatype just the way it is.

Best Regards, Simon Riggs



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: David Fetter
Date:
Subject: Re: Error Codes
Next
From: "Marc G. Fournier"
Date:
Subject: Re: LinuxTag wrapup