Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On Tue, 2004-07-20 at 13:51, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Ugh. I'm beginning to think we ought to revert the patch that added the
>> don't-split-across-files logic to XLogInsert; that seems to have broken
>> more assumptions than I realized.
> The problem was that a zero length XLOG_WASTED_SPACE record just fell
> out of ReadRecord when it shouldn't have. By giving it a helping hand it
> makes it through with pointers correctly set, and everything else was
> already thought of in the earlier patch, so xlog_redo etc happens.
Yeah, but the WASTED_SPACE/FILE_HEADER stuff is already pretty ugly, and
adding two more warts to the code to support it is sticking in my craw.
I'm thinking it would be cleaner to treat the extra labeling information
as an extension of the WAL page header.
regards, tom lane