Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
> * Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> [100210 02:33]:
>  
>> Hmm, so after running restore_command, check the file size and if it's
>> too short, treat it the same as if restore_command returned non-zero?
>> And it will be retried on the next iteration. Works for me, though OTOH
>> it will then fail to complain about a genuinely WAL file that's
>> truncated for some reason. I guess there's no way around that, even if
>> you have a script as restore_command that does the file size check, it
>> will have the same problem.
> 
> But isn't this something every current PITR archive already "works
> around"...  Everybody doing PITR archives already know the importance of
> making the *appearance* of the WAL filename in the archive atomic.

Well, pg_standby does defend against that, but you don't use pg_standby
with the built-in standby mode anymore. It would be reasonable to have
the same level of defenses built-in. It's essentially a one-line change,
and saves a lot of trouble and risk of subtle misconfiguration for admins.

> Don't docs warn about plain cp not being atomic and allowing "short"
> files to appear in the archive... 

Hmm, I don't see anything about that at quick glance. Besides, normal
PITR doesn't have a problem with that, because it will stop when it
reaches the end of archived WAL anyway.

-- 
  Heikki Linnakangas
  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

• Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make standby servercontinuously retry restoring the next WAL at 2010-02-10 13:45:00 from Aidan Van Dyk

pgsql-docs by date

Next:	From: Thom Brown	Date: 2010-02-10 22:43:13
	Subject: Confusing link in streaming replication section
Previous:	From: Aidan Van Dyk	Date: 2010-02-10 13:45:00
	Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make standby servercontinuously retry restoring the next WAL

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Alvaro Herrera	Date: 2010-02-10 16:56:00
	Subject: Re: pg_restore --single-transaction and --clean
Previous:	From: Tom Lane	Date: 2010-02-10 16:50:03
	Subject: Re: Some belated patch review for "Buffers" explain analyze patch

pgsql-committers by date

Next:	From: User H-saito	Date: 2010-02-11 04:46:30
	Subject: psqlodbc - psqlodbc: Addition changes.
Previous:	From: Aidan Van Dyk	Date: 2010-02-10 13:45:00
	Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make standby servercontinuously retry restoring the next WAL