On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 5:31 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > So it's interesting that this only happens with a particular gcc version, > because it's not apparent to me why it works properly for anybody. > Isn't hitting a zero record length an expected case when we run ahead of > the amount of WAL produced by the master?
At least while walreceiver is running, recovery doesn't go ahead of the last receive location. So that's not an expected case. 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
