Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakan...@vmware.com> writes:
> On 13.02.2013 21:30, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Well, archive recovery is a different scenario --- Simon was questioning
>> whether we need a minRecoveryPoint mechanism in crash recovery, or at
>> least that's what I thought he asked.
> Ah, ok. The short answer to that is "no", because in crash recovery, we
> just replay the WAL all the way to the end. I thought he was questioning
> updating the control file at every XLogFlush() during archive recovery.
> The answer to that is that it's not so bad, because XLogFlush() is
> called so infrequently during recovery.
Right, and it's not so evil from a reliability standpoint either, partly
because of that and partly because, by definition, this isn't your only
copy of the data.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
