On 2020/01/18 12:48, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 07:36:51PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 1:47 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>>> Thanks. I have few tweaks to propose to the docs.
>>>
>>> + raise a PANIC-level error, aborting the recovery. Setting
>>> Instead of "PANIC-level error", I would just use "PANIC error", and
>>
>> I have no strong opinion about this, but I used "PANIC-level error"
>> because the description for data_sync_retry has already used it.
>
> Okay. Fine with what you think is good.
>
>>> instead of "aborting the recovery" just "crashing the server".
>>
>> PANIC implies server crash, so IMO "crashing the server" is
>> a bit redundant, and "aborting the recovery" is better because
>> "continue the recovery" is used later.
>
> Okay. I see your point here.
>
>> So, what about
>>
>> ---------------
>> causes the system to ignore invalid page references in WAL records
>> (but still report a warning), and continue the recovery.
>> ---------------
>
> And that sounds good to me. Switching the patch as ready for
> committer.
Thanks! Committed!
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NTT DATA CORPORATION
Advanced Platform Technology Group
Research and Development Headquarters
