On Wed, 2009-03-04 at 17:19 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > This behavior might be all right for an emergency recovery kind of tool, > but I can't see us considering it a supported feature. I agree post-recovery cleanup would be required to bring up a fully safe read-write database. That's one of the reasons my longer term thoughts are towards running transactions immediately after recovery completes, for other uses also. > The larger point though is that I suspect what the OP really is looking > for is "restore just this one database into my existing cluster, without > breaking the other databases that are already in it". There is zero > chance of ever doing that with a WAL-based backup --- transaction ID > inconsistencies would break it, even without considering the contents > of shared catalogs. Agreed. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support -- Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
