On Wed, 2009-03-04 at 17:19 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> This behavior might be all right for an emergency recovery kind of tool,
> but I can't see us considering it a supported feature.
I agree post-recovery cleanup would be required to bring up a fully safe
read-write database. That's one of the reasons my longer term thoughts
are towards running transactions immediately after recovery completes,
for other uses also.
> The larger point though is that I suspect what the OP really is looking
> for is "restore just this one database into my existing cluster, without
> breaking the other databases that are already in it". There is zero
> chance of ever doing that with a WAL-based backup --- transaction ID
> inconsistencies would break it, even without considering the contents
> of shared catalogs.
Agreed.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support