>> You may find that if you check this case again that the >"usually no data >> corruption" is actually "usually lost transactions but no >corruption". > >That's a good point, but it seems difficult to be sure of the last >reportedly-committed transaction in a powerfail situation. Maybe if >you drive the test from a client on another machine?
FYI, that's what I did. Test client ran across the network to the server, so it could output on the console which transaction was last reported commityted. In a couple of cases, the server came up with a transaction the client had *not* reported as committed. But I think that can be explained by the commit message not reaching the client over the network before power went out. //Magnus ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly