Re: Stronger safeguard for archive recovery not to miss data - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Laurenz Albe
Subject Re: Stronger safeguard for archive recovery not to miss data
Date
Msg-id 31f2601cf5856f0da985b12187b222bc5e338567.camel@cybertec.at
Whole thread Raw
In response to RE: Stronger safeguard for archive recovery not to miss data  ("osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com" <osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com>)
Responses Re: Stronger safeguard for archive recovery not to miss data  (Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, 2021-01-21 at 13:09 +0000, osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com wrote:
> > My vote is that we should not have a GUC for such an unlikely event, and that
> > stopping recovery is good enough.
> 
> OK. IIUC, my current patch for this fix doesn't need to be changed or withdrawn.
> Thank you for your explanation.

Well, that's just my opinion.
Fujii Masao seemed to disagree with the patch, and his voice carries weight.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: New IndexAM API controlling index vacuum strategies
Next
From: Amul Sul
Date:
Subject: Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY