Re: Point in Time Recovery - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD
Subject Re: Point in Time Recovery
Date
Msg-id 46C15C39FEB2C44BA555E356FBCD6FA40184D134@m0114.s-mxs.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Point in Time Recovery  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Point in Time Recovery  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
> Well, Tom does seem to have something with regard to StartUpIds. I feel
> it is easier to force a new timeline by adding a very large number to
> the LogId IF, and only if, we have performed an archive recovery. That
> way, we do not change at all the behaviour of the system for people that
> choose not to implement archive_mode.

Imho you should take a close look at StartUpId, I think it is exactly this
"large number". Maybe you can add +2 to intentionally leave a hole.

Once you increment, I think it is very essential to checkpoint and double
check pg_control, cause otherwise a crashrecovery would read the wrong xlogs.
> Should we implement timelines?

Yes :-)

Andreas


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Postgresql on SAN
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: plperl security