Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 09:28:43AM -0800, Sriram Dandapani wrote:
> > I was referring to the logs in the archive folder specified when WAL
> > archiving is turned on...not the pg_xlog folder.
> >
> > I assume postgres will not use the logs in the archive folder
>
> Correct.
On Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 09:28:43AM -0800, Sriram Dandapani wrote:
> I was referring to the logs in the archive folder specified when WAL
> archiving is turned on...not the pg_xlog folder.
>
> I assume postgres will not use the logs in the archive folder
Correct. And I believe if you have PITR ena
: Andy Shellam
Cc: Sriram Dandapani; pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] WAL file naming convention
On Sat, Mar 25, 2006 at 05:51:13PM -, Andy Shellam wrote:
> As PostgreSQL numbers WALs sequentially, as long as your ls command by
> default orders listings by filename, then Yes.
: Saturday, 25 March, 2006 12:30 am
> To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
> Subject: [ADMIN] WAL file naming convention
>
>
>
> Hi
>
>
>
> Is is safe to assume that the unix ls command will return WAL files in the
> same sequence as postgres creates them.
&g
: Saturday, 25 March, 2006 12:30 amTo:
pgsql-admin@postgresql.orgSubject: [ADMIN] WAL file naming
convention
Hi
Is is safe to assume that the unix
ls command will return WAL files in the same sequence as postgres creates
them.
e.g will ls
return files in the order that postgres created
Hi
Is is safe to assume that the unix ls command will return
WAL files in the same sequence as postgres creates them.
e.g will ls return files in the
order that postgres created them
