On Fri, 2009-10-02 at 11:26 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Fri, 2009-10-02 at 10:43 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >
> >> It seems dangerous to write a WAL record after the shutdown checkpoint.
> >> It will be overwritten by subsequent startup, which is a recipe for trouble.
> >
> > I've said its a corner case and not worth spending time on. I'm putting
> > it in at your request. If it's not correct before and not correct after,
> > where exactly do you want it?
>
> I don't know. Perhaps it should go between the REDO pointer of the
> shutdown checkpoint and the checkpoint record itself.
That would seem minimally invasive approach and would appear to work for
both cases. Will do.
-- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com