On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Regrettably, the patch doesn't remove the problem it was supposed to
> remove and I'm highlighting there is still risk of data loss. I suggest
> that we don't change any docs, and carefully word or even avoid any
> release note inclusion to avoid lulling people into stopping safety
> measures.
I think it's pretty clear that you and the OP are talking about two
different problems. To quote Guillaume:
"Yes, the problem is that before this change, even with a working
replication and a clean shutdown, you still had to replicate the last
WAL file by hand."
I think that's a pretty legitimate complaint. You seem to that this
wasn't worth fixing at this point in the development cycle, because it
was always possible to write a script to copy that last WAL file by
hand. That's a judgment call, of course, and you are entitled to your
own opinion on the topic, but that doesn't mean that the complaint, as
defined by the person complaining, hasn't been fixed.
...Robert
