On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 7:25 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > Fujii Masao wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 2:22 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Can someone explain to me in plain language what problem this is >>> trying to fix? I'm having trouble figuring it out. >> >> The problem is that pg_xlogfile_name(pg_last_xlog_receive_location()) and >> pg_xlogfile_name(pg_last_xlog_replay_location()) might report an inaccurate >> WAL file name because currently pg_xlogfile_name() always uses the current >> timeline to calculate the WAL file name. For example, even though the last >> applied WAL file is 000000010000000000000002, the standby wrongly reports >> that 000000000000000000000002 has been applied last. > > Should we throw an error in pg_xlogfile_name() if called during > recovery? It's not doing anything useful as it is.
I have no objection for now. Regards, -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
