On 19.10.2010 22:40, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 09:51 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
>> On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 12:26 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>>> Excluding pg_xlog is just a recommendation at the moment, though, so we
>>> would need a big warning in the docs. And some way to enforce that
>>> just_kidding is not included in the backup would be nice, maybe we could
>>> remove read-permission from it?
>> Hmm, removing the read bit would add some confidence into the process. I
>> like that idea better than just assuming that the user won't copy it.
>> I think I like this direction most, because it doesn't leave us
>> guessing. If the file is there then we assume normal recovery. If we
>> encounter recovery.conf we throw FATAL. If we encounter backup_label we
>> can simply remove it (perhaps with a warning that there was a crash in
>> the middle of a backup).
> On second thought, this doesn't sound backpatch-friendly. We should
> probably put a simpler fix in first and back-patch it. Then we can do
> something like your proposal for 9.1. What do you think of my proposed
Yes, let's go ahead with your original patch.
It seems we should use ReadRecord instead of the lower-level
XLogPageRead function. One difference is that ReadRecord performs a
bunch of sanity checks on the record, while XLogPageRead just reads the
raw page. Extra sanity checking before removing backup_label seems like
a good idea. Another difference is that in standby-mode, ReadRecord will
retry until it succeeds. A standby server should keep retrying, even the
very first record, until it succeeds, otherwise we have a change in
So I'm thinking of the attached patch. I'll give this some testing on
older branches and commit.
In response to
pgsql-bugs by date
|Next:||From: Jochen Erwied||Date: 2010-10-25 12:42:24|
|Subject: BUG #5722: vacuum full does not update last_vacuum statistics|
|Previous:||From: Vincent Maury||Date: 2010-10-25 10:09:25|
|Subject: postgresql install failure on Ubuntu 10.10|