From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Point in Time Recovery |
Date: | 2004-07-19 22:57:17 |
Message-ID: | 1090277836.28049.558.camel@stromboli |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 2004-07-17 at 00:57, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> OK, I think I have some solid ideas and reasons for them.
>
Sorry for taking so long to reply...
> First, I think we need server-side functions to call when we start/stop
> the backup. The advantage of these server-side functions is that they
> will do the required work of recording the pg_control values and
> creating needed files with little chance for user error. It also allows
> us to change the internal operations in later releases without requiring
> admins to change their procedures. We are even able to adjust the
> internal operation in minor releases without forcing a new procedure on
> users.
Yes, I think we should go down this route. ....there's a "but" and that
is we don't absolutely need it for correctness....and so I must decline
adding it to THIS release. I don't imagine I'll stop be associated with
this code for a while yet....
Can we recommend that users should expect to have to call a start and
end backup routine in later releases? Don't expect you'll agree to
that..
>
> Second, I think once we start a restore, we should rename recovery.conf
> to recovery.in_progress, and when complete rename that to
> recovery.done. If the postmaster starts and sees recovery.in_progress,
> it will fail to start knowing its recovery was interrupted. This allows
> the admin to take appropriate action. (I am not sure what that action
> would be. Does he bring back the backup files or just keep going?)
>
Superceded by Tom's actions. Two states are required: start and stop.
Recovery isn't going to be checkpoint-restartable anytime soon, IMHO.
Best regards, Simon Riggs
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gavin M. Roy | 2004-07-19 23:09:40 | localhost redux |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-07-19 22:15:12 | Re: Why we really need timelines *now* in PITR |