Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Recovery bug

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Recovery bug
Date: 2010-10-19 19:40:14
Message-ID: 1287517214.20345.5.camel@jdavis-ux.asterdata.local (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs
On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 09:51 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 12:26 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> > Excluding pg_xlog is just a recommendation at the moment, though, so we 
> > would need a big warning in the docs. And some way to enforce that 
> > just_kidding is not included in the backup would be nice, maybe we could 
> > remove read-permission from it?
> 
> Hmm, removing the read bit would add some confidence into the process. I
> like that idea better than just assuming that the user won't copy it.
> 
> I think I like this direction most, because it doesn't leave us
> guessing. If the file is there then we assume normal recovery. If we
> encounter recovery.conf we throw FATAL. If we encounter backup_label we
> can simply remove it (perhaps with a warning that there was a crash in
> the middle of a backup).
> 

On second thought, this doesn't sound backpatch-friendly. We should
probably put a simpler fix in first and back-patch it. Then we can do
something like your proposal for 9.1. What do you think of my proposed
patch?

Regards,
	Jeff Davis


In response to

Responses

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-10-19 20:55:13
Subject: Re: Recovery bug
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-10-19 19:15:06
Subject: Re: BUG #5716: Regression joining tables in UPDATE with composite types

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group