Re: Avoiding adjacent checkpoint records - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Avoiding adjacent checkpoint records
Date
Msg-id 26675.1339245822@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Avoiding adjacent checkpoint records  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> So now the standard for my patches is that I must consider what will
> happen if the xlog is deleted?

When you're messing around with something that affects data integrity, yes.
The long and the short of it is that this patch does reduce our ability
to recover from easily-foreseeable disasters.  The problem it was meant
to solve is not dire enough to justify that, and other fixes are
possible that don't require any compromises in this dimension.
So please revert.  We can revisit the original complaint in 9.3.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: log_newpage header comment
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: log_newpage header comment