Re: [PATCHES] Infrastructure changes for recovery - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: [PATCHES] Infrastructure changes for recovery
Date
Msg-id 1222184541.4445.400.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCHES] Infrastructure changes for recovery  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [PATCHES] Infrastructure changes for recovery  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 23:06 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-09-18 at 10:09 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> 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 would take some close investigation,
> > which maybe isn't warranted if you have a less-invasive solution.
>
> OK, new patch, version 6. Some major differences to previous patch.

> Ready for serious review prior to commit. I will be performing further
> testing also.

Version 7

I've removed the concept of interrupting a restartpoint half way
through, I found a fault there. It was more ugly than the alternative
and less robust. The code now waits at the end of recovery if we are in
the middle of a restartpoint, but forces a do-it-more-quickly also. That
means we won't always get a fast start even though we skip the shutdown
checkpoint, but at least we're sure there's no chance of breakage
because of concurrent activiy, state changes etc..

I'm happy with this now.

--
 Simon Riggs           www.2ndQuadrant.com
 PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Greg Sabino Mullane"
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_type.h regression?
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal of SE-PostgreSQL patches (for CommitFest:Sep)