Re: Michael Paquier 2016-05-24 <CAB7nPqQRXsC8=ozh6GpjLnpZ=MeooUZOaAbzx28n2bjSMv2B4g@mail.gmail.com>
> Yeah, that's really something that covers only a narrow case, though
> if we don't have it when we need it we're limited to some hacks.
> Perhaps people who have the advanced level to use such a thing have
> the level to use hacks anyway..
I'd think recovery_target_lsn would be more useful in practice than
the existing recovery_target_xid. So I don't see why it shouldn't just
be added, also given it's likely very unobtrusive to do so.
Christoph
