From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Tom Lane
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com> writes:
>> So I think we should change pg_resetxlog -l option to take a WAL file
>> name as argument, and fix pg_upgrade accordingly.
> Seems reasonable I guess. It's really specifying a starting WAL
> location, but only to file granularity, so treating the argument as a
> file name is sort of a type cheat but seems convenient.
> If we do it that way, we'd better validate that the argument is a legal
> WAL file name, so as to catch any cases where somebody tries to do it
> old-style.
> BTW, does pg_resetxlog's logic for setting the default -l value (from
> scanning pg_xlog to find the largest existing file name) still work?
It finds the segment number for largest existing file name from pg_xlog and
then compare it with input provided by the
user for -l Option, if input is greater it will use the input to set in
control file.
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
