On 9 May 2013 22:39, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
>> If the current WAL record is corrupt and the next WAL record is in
>> every way valid, we can potentially continue.
>
> That seems like a seriously bad idea.
I agree. But if you knew that were true, is stopping a better idea?
Any corrupt WAL record needs to halt recovery. What I'm thinking is to
check whether it might be possible to continue, and if all looks good,
offer the user the option to continue.
"Continuing could be dangerous and might cause deeper corruption of
your database. We suggest you take a backup of the server before
continuing"
--Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
