On 03.12.2011 01:25, Daniel Farina wrote:
> Here's a protocol: have pg_start_backup() write a file that just means
> "backing up". Restarts are OK, because that's all it means, it has no
> meaning to a recovery/restoration process.
> When one wishes to restore, one must touch a file -- not unlike the
> trigger file in recovery.conf (some have argued in the past this
> *should* be recovery.conf, except perhaps for its tendency to be moved
> to recovery.done) to have that behavior occur.
At the moment, if the situation is ambiguous, the system assumes that
you're restoring from a backup. What your suggestion amounts to is to
reverse tht assumption, and assume instead that you're doing crash
recovery on a system where a backup was being taken. In that case, if
you take a backup with pg_base_backup(), and fail to archive the WAL
files correctly, or forget to create a recovery.conf file, the database
will happily start up from the backup, but is in fact corrupt. That is
not good either.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Heikki Linnakangas||Date: 2011-12-03 16:37:14|
|Subject: Re: Bug in walsender when calling out to do_pg_stop_backup (and others?)|
|Previous:||From: Magnus Hagander||Date: 2011-12-03 14:59:46|
|Subject: Re: [PATCH] PostgreSQL fails to build with 32bit MinGW-w64|