On Thu, 2010-02-11 at 14:22 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 09:32 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >> Hmm, so after running restore_command, check the file size and if it's
> >> too short, treat it the same as if restore_command returned non-zero?
> >> And it will be retried on the next iteration. Works for me, though OTOH
> >> it will then fail to complain about a genuinely WAL file that's
> >> truncated for some reason. I guess there's no way around that, even if
> >> you have a script as restore_command that does the file size check, it
> >> will have the same problem.
> >
> > Are we trying to re-invent pg_standby here?
>
> That's not the goal, but we seem to need some of the same functionality
> in the backend now.
I think you need to say why...
-- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com