On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 6:10 PM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 23 August 2016 at 09:39, Petr Jelinek <p...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > >> Looks very reasonable to me (both patches). Thanks for doing that. >> >> I am inclined to mark this as ready for committer. > > Looking at it now. > > The messages for recovery_target_lsn don't mention after or before, as > do other targets... e.g. > recoveryStopAfter ? "after" : "before", > My understanding is that if you request an LSN that isn't the exact > end point of a WAL record then it will either stop before or after the > requested point, so that needs to be described in the docs and in the > messages generated prior to starting to search. > > Everything else looks in good order.
You are right, this message should be completed as such. Do you want an updated patch? -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
