| From: | Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Ross J(dot) Reedstrom" <reedstrm(at)rice(dot)edu>, Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> |
| Subject: | File versioning (was: Big 7.1 open items) |
| Date: | 2000-06-26 08:09:13 |
| Message-ID: | 219F68D65015D011A8E000006F8590C605BA598B@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Besides which, OID alone doesn't give us a possibility of file
> versioning, and as I commented to Vadim I think we will want that,
> WAL or no WAL. So it seems to me the two viable choices are
> unique-id or OID+version-number. Either way, the file-naming behavior
> should be the same across all platforms.
I do not think the only problem of a failing rename of "temp" to "new"
on startup rollforward is issue enough to justify the additional complexity
a version implys.
Why not simply abort startup of postmaster in such an event and let the
dba fix it. There can be no data loss.
If e.g. the permissions of the directory are insufficient we will want to
abort
startup anyway, no?
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Zeugswetter Andreas SB | 2000-06-26 08:17:05 | AW: Proposal: More flexible backup/restore via pg_dump |
| Previous Message | Peter Mount | 2000-06-26 08:06:12 | Contacting me |