On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 5:27 AM, Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> One thing I would like to ask is that why you think walreceiver is more > appropriate for writing XLOG_END_OF_RECOVERY record than startup > process. I was thinking the opposite, because if we do so, we might be > able to skip the end-of-recovery checkpoint even in file-based log-shipping > case. Right now, WALReceiver has one code path/use case. Startup has so many, its much harder to know whether we'll screw up one of them. If we can add it in either place then I choose the simplest, most relevant place. If the code is the same, we can move it around later. Let me write the code and then we can think some more. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
