On Tue, 2010-04-27 at 20:13 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> > On Tue, 2010-04-27 at 18:08 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Huh? How is a filter as coarse as an oldest-running-XID filter going
> >> to prevent that? And aren't we initializing from trustworthy data in
> >> ProcArrayApplyRecoveryInfo, anyway?
> >>
> >> I still say it's useless.
>
> > Quite possibly. Your looking at other code outside of this patch. I'm
> > happy that you do so, but is it immediately related? I can have another
> > look when we finish this.
>
> Well, it's nearby anyway. I've committed the present patch (with a
> number of fixes). While I was looking at it I came across several
> things in the existing code that I think are either wrong or at least
> inadequately documented --- the above complaint is just the tip of the
> iceberg. I'm going to make another pass over it to see if I'm just
> missing things, and then report back.
Thank you for your input and changes.
You're welcome to share my iceberg.
-- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
