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

From spock@mgnet.de
Subject Re: Point in Time Recovery
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.58.0407061250040.14377@spock.intra.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Point in Time Recovery  ("Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA@spardat.at>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 6 Jul 2004, Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD wrote:

> > Should we use a different datatype than time_t for the commit timestamp,
> > one that offers more fine grained differentiation between checkpoints?
>
> Imho seconds is really sufficient. If you know a more precise position
> you will probably know it from backend log or an xlog sniffer. With those
> you can easily use the TransactionId way.

I'd also think that seconds are absolutely sufficient. From my daily
experience I can say that you're normally lucky to know the time
on one minute basis.
If you need to get closer, a log sniffer is unavoidable ...

Greetings, Klaus

-- 
Full Name   : Klaus Naumann     | (http://www.mgnet.de/) (Germany)
Phone / FAX : ++49/177/7862964  | E-Mail: (kn@mgnet.de)


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: ggray
Date:
Subject: Re: strange bug in plperl
Next
From: Oliver Jowett
Date:
Subject: Re: Nested Transactions, Abort All