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

Re: Online Backups: Minor Caveat, Major Addition?

From: "Thomas F(dot) O'Connell" <tfo(at)sitening(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Online Backups: Minor Caveat, Major Addition?
Date: 2006-03-20 22:57:23
Message-ID: 2DD8310C-92A3-495D-8AA5-499E6E43B28C@sitening.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs
On Mar 20, 2006, at 4:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote:

> "Thomas F. O'Connell" <tfo(at)sitening(dot)com> writes:
>> A base backup taken from a running postmaster will still include a
>> postmaster.pid file, which will prevent a new postmaster from being
>> able to be started.
>
> Usually not; only if the PID mentioned in the file belongs to an
> existing process belonging to the postgres userid does Postgres  
> believe
> that the pidfile is valid.
>
> It might be worth mentioning this as you suggest, but I think it's a
> sufficiently low-probability case that your failure was probably  
> due to
> something else.

My test scenario involved setting up a new cluster on the same  
machine as the base postgres I was attempting to recover. So you're  
probably right about the rarity.

What about the larger suggested change of breaking that section into  
three more granular subsections? I could see commentary being  
slightly more helpful for each.

--
Thomas F. O'Connell
Database Architecture and Programming
Co-Founder
Sitening, LLC

http://www.sitening.com/
3004 B Poston Avenue
Nashville, TN 37203-1314
615-260-0005 (cell)
615-469-5150 (office)
615-469-5151 (fax)

In response to

Responses

pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-03-20 23:12:35
Subject: Re: Online Backups: Minor Caveat, Major Addition?
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-03-20 22:48:45
Subject: Re: Online Backups: Minor Caveat, Major Addition?

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