Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-01-27 at 20:11 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> Simon Riggs wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2009-01-27 at 17:50 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hmm, I think we have small issue if the last WAL segment restored from
>>>> the archive is an incomplete one:
>>> All normal archive recoveries have "complete" WAL files, since an xlog
>>> switch record jumps past missing entries at the end of the file. So I
>>> was just about to say "how can it be an incomplete one?", to which the
>>> answer is file damage of some kind causing a failed CRC check.
>>>
>>> So yes, it is possible and no, the patch doesn't work that way yet.
>> Actually, the code already deals with that possibility. That's the
>> motivation for the timelines: the new WAL record will be generated with
>> a new timelineid. We never append to an existing WAL file after archive
>> recovery.
>
> Now I'm confused. You're disagreeing with what you just said?
Right. I thought I found a problem, but then I found out that it's not a
problem. Aka false alarm.
-- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
