Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes:
> >> + ereport(NOTICE,
> >> + (errmsg("performing checkpoint")));
>
> > You've *got* to be kidding.
>
> Sigh. I have to apologize for that over-hasty complaint: I misread
> where you intended to put the message. (Seems like there is too
> much stuff in xlog.c that executes in too many different contexts.
> Maybe we could split it up sometime.)
>
> Still, I don't much like this solution. I agree with Heikki:
> let's just fix it.
Agreed, fixing it is better than trying to document/report odd behavior.
There was talk about making pg_start_backup do an immediate checkpoint
but there was some discussion that you wouldn't want an I/O storm from
pg_start_backup(). However, figuring you are going to do the tar backup
anyway, the pg_start_backup I/O seems trivial.
--
Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
