On Sat, Apr 30, 2005 at 03:10:17PM -0400, David Parker wrote:
> So my question is: is there any way to signal slon to go ahead with the
> copy, or to somehow manually update the slony database to indicate that
> the transactions are up-to-date? Obviously one doesn't want to go blindy
> doing stuff like this, but "faking-out" the slon would be less harmful
> in this case than killing postmaster processes....

How can you be sure of that?  (This question is the one which
implicitly underlies the decision to rely on xid.)  If people are
sitting open in transactions, you can't know that telling slony to go
ahead is safe -- they might yet do something which breaks you.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan  | ajs at crankycanuck.ca
This work was visionary and imaginative, and goes to show that visionary
and imaginative work need not end up well. 
		--Dennis Ritchie