Re: Avoiding shutdown checkpoint at failover

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 1:48 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> The reason we run a shutdown checkpoint is to prevent needing to
>> re-enter recovery if we crash after promotion.
>
> That's *a* reason, it's not necessarily the only reason.  This proposal
> worries me, especially your blithe dismissal of the timeline issues;
> but in any case I would not trust it without a detailed review of all
> WAL replay activities, which you don't sound to have done.

What timeline issues are you thinking of? Timelines were invented to
avoid confusion with PITR. The reality is that they don't have much
reason to exist in the world of replication and could be dispensed
with in that context easily if there are issues associated with them.

I believe the solution to be simple and wish it had occurred to me earlier.

If you can think of a reason to not do this, let me know.

--
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services