On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 6:10 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
<horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> It applies the master and compiled cleanly and no error by
> regtest. (I didn't confirmed that the problem is still fixed but
> seemingly no problem)
Thanks for double-checking.
> If I'm not missing something, at the worst we have a checkpoint
> after a checkpointer restart that should have been supressed. Is
> it worth picking it up for the complexity?
I think so, that's not that much code if you think about it as there
is already a routine to get the timestamp of the lastly switched
segment that gets used by checkpointer.c.
--
Michael