Re: [HACKERS] Remove secondary checkpoint

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tsunakawa, Takayuki
Тема Re: [HACKERS] Remove secondary checkpoint
Дата
Msg-id 0A3221C70F24FB45833433255569204D1F80B8E1@G01JPEXMBYT05
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] Remove secondary checkpoint  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] Remove secondary checkpoint  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
From: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
> [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Tom Lane
> Doesn't it also make crash recovery less robust?  The whole point
> of that mechanism is to be able to cope if the latest checkpoint
> record is unreadable.

If the latest checkpoint record is unreadable (the WAL segment/block/record is corrupt?), recovery from the previous
checkpointwould also stop at the latest checkpoint.  And we don't need to replay the WAL records between the previous
checkpointand the latest one, because their changes are already persisted when the latest checkpoint was taken.  So,
theuser should just do pg_resetxlog and start the database server when the recovery cannot find the latest checkpoint
recordand PANICs?
 

Regards
Takayuki Tsunakawa






-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: [HACKERS] Implementing pg_receivewal --no-sync
Следующее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Remove secondary checkpoint