On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 12:46:05PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 02:56:57PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > +1. I'd support recording the time of the last crash recovery, as
> > well as having a counter. I think an LSN would not be as useful
> > as a timestamp.
>
> One could guess a timestamp based on a LSN, no? So I'd like to think
> the opposite actually: a LSN would be more useful than a timestamp.
Wouldn't that work only if the LSN is recent enough, depending on the WAL
activity?
