From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Archive recovery won't be completed on some situation. |
Date: | 2014-03-24 11:26:29 |
Message-ID: | CAHGQGwG3nrhpG3ibRUnnOWBcH-_0N647_Da6841j3psEARTKCw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
<horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> At Wed, 19 Mar 2014 19:34:10 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote
>> > Agreed. Attached patches do that and I could "recover" the
>> > database state with following steps,
>>
>> Adding new option looks like new feature rather than bug fix.
>> I'm afraid that the backpatch of such a change to 9.3 or before
>> is not acceptable.
>
> Me too. But on the other hand it simplly is a relief for the
> consequence of the behavior of server (altough it was ill
> operation:), and especially it is needed for at least 9.1 which
> seems cannot be saved without it. Plus it has utterly no impact
> on servers' behavior of any corresponding versions. So I hope it
> is accepted.
Even in 9.1, we can think that problematic situation as database corruption
and restart the server from the backup which was successfully taken before.
No?
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2014-03-24 11:59:01 | Re: Standby server won't start |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2014-03-24 11:22:52 | Re: Review: plpgsql.extra_warnings, plpgsql.extra_errors |