Re: [HACKERS] Infrastructure changes for recovery
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Infrastructure changes for recovery |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1221080797.3913.768.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Infrastructure changes for recovery (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Infrastructure changes for recovery
Re: [HACKERS] Infrastructure changes for recovery |
Список | pgsql-patches |
On Mon, 2008-09-08 at 13:34 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > ISTM that it would probably be better if there were exactly one InRedo > flag in shared memory, probably in xlog.c's shared state, with the > postmaster not being responsible for setting or clearing it; rather > the startup process should do those things. Done > > * bgwriter and stats process starts in consistent recovery mode. > > bgwriter changes mode when startup process completes. > > I'm not sure about the interaction of this. In particular, what about > recovery restart points before we have reached the safe stop point? > I don't think we want to give up the capability of having those. > > Also, it seems pretty bogus to update the in-memory ControlFile > checkpoint values before the restart point is actually done. It looks > to me like what you have done is to try to use those fields as signaling > for the restart request in addition to their existing purposes, which > I think is confusing and probably dangerous. I'd rather there were a > different signaling path and ControlFile maintains its currrent > definition. Done Testing takes a while on this, I probably won't complete it until Friday. So enclosed patch is for eyeballs only at this stage. I added in the XLogCtl padding we've discussed before, while I'm there. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
Вложения
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: