Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-04-28 at 14:21 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Is there any use in looking
>> at wal_keep_segments as part of this test?
> I would hope that pg_stop_backup() will have a conditional ERROR message
> to say
> ERROR backup inconsistent and cannot be used for SR
> HINT increase wal_keep_segments or enable archiving for your base backup
Hmm, you could start streaming the WAL before you start the backup, so
the fact that you've already removed some segments that are needed to
restore from the backup by the time pg_stop_backup() is called doesn't
necessarily mean that the backup is useless.
You'd need a stand-alone tool to do the streaming in that case, and no
such tool exists yet, but I would be surprised if one doesn't appear on
pgfoundry sooner or later :-).
In case it's not clear to casual readers out there:
You will get an error as soon as you try to start the standby,
complaining that it can't find the WAL segment it needs in the primary
anymore. Not silent corruption.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Greg Stark||Date: 2010-04-28 18:54:53|
|Subject: Re: Differential backup|
|Previous:||From: Kevin Grittner||Date: 2010-04-28 18:39:28|
|Subject: Re: explicit (void *) casts|