| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | spam_from_pgsql_lists(at)chezphil(dot)org, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #15335: Documentation is wrong about archive_command and existing files |
| Date: | 2018-08-19 00:49:39 |
| Message-ID: | 20180819004939.GB1785@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 04:10:00PM +0000, PG Bug reporting form wrote:
> Note that the example archive commands in the documentation (using cp) get
> this wrong. Minimal examples of archive commands that do this check
> correctly would be very useful.
This example is wrong for other reasons, one being that archive_command
should sync the archived file before returning its result back to the
backend to make it durable.
> (I worry that the non-WAL files that archive_command and restore_command are
> also invoked for, e.g. the .backup and .history files, have some additional
> or possibly even conflicting requirements.)
Conflicting requirements depend on your cluster and archiving strategy.
Overwriting a WAL segment archived is usually wrong.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Steele | 2018-08-19 21:42:12 | Re: BUG #15335: Documentation is wrong about archive_command and existing files |
| Previous Message | Jeff Janes | 2018-08-19 00:09:06 | Re: BUG #15335: Documentation is wrong about archive_command and existing files |