Re: Point in Time Recovery

From: markir(at)coretech(dot)co(dot)nz
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Point in Time Recovery
Date: 2004-07-30 03:22:14
Message-ID: 1091157734.2f5c68b0cf535@mail.coretech.co.nz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Quoting Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>:

> Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> > I was wondering about this point - might it not be just as reasonable
> > for the copied file to *be* an exact image of pg_control? Then a very
> > simple variant of pg_controldata (or maybe even just adding switches to
> > pg_controldata itself) would enable the relevant info to be extracted
>
> We didn't do that so admins could easily read the file contents.
>
Ease of reading is a good thing, no argument there.

However using 'pg_controldata' (or similar) to perform the read is not really
that much harder than using 'cat' - (it is a wee bit harder, I grant you)

When I posted the original mail I was thinking that the pg_control image is good
because it has much more information than just the last wal offset, and could
be used to perform a recovery in the advent of the "actual" pg_control being
unsuitable (e.g. backed up last instead of first on a busy system).

Of couse this thinking didn't make it into the original mail, sorry about that!

regards

Mark

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mamta Singh 2004-07-30 04:53:02 Regarding redo/undo files.
Previous Message Matthew T. O'Connor 2004-07-29 20:23:29 Re: extra info on autovaccum log