Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] Re: BUG #4796: Recovery followed by backupcreates unrecoverable WAL-file

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Mikael Krantz <mk(at)zigamorph(dot)se>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: BUG #4796: Recovery followed by backupcreates unrecoverable WAL-file
Date: 2009-05-16 08:04:38
Message-ID: 1242461078.3843.908.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-bugspgsql-hackers
On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 18:03 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:

> I didn't read this thread earlier, but now that I have, it seems to be
> making a mountain out of a molehill.  

We've discussed a complex issue to pursue other nascent bugs. It's
confused all of us at some point, but seems we're thru that now.

Why do you think the issue on this thread has become a mountain? I don't
see anything other than a docs improvement coming out of it. (The last
thread on pg_standby *was* a mountain IMHO, but that has nothing to do
with this, other than the usual suspects being involved).

> It is entirely false that
> you've got to keep the history files on the live server.

There was a similar suggestion that was already clearly dropped, after

I (still) think that keeping the history files that have been used to
build the current timeline would be an important documentary record for
DBAs, especially since we encourage people to add their own notes to
them. The safest place for them would be in the data directory. Keeping
them there would be a minor new feature, not any kind of bug fix.

> I've got no objection to clarifying the documentation's rather offhand
> statement about this, 


> but let's clarify it correctly.

Of course.

 Simon Riggs 
 PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Stefan KaltenbrunnerDate: 2009-05-16 15:23:39
Subject: Re: bytea vs. pg_dump
Previous:From: Euler Taveira de OliveiraDate: 2009-05-16 02:41:01
Subject: some more plural messages

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Dave PageDate: 2009-05-16 17:56:29
Subject: Re: Perl 5.10 vs. PG 8.4 on Win32
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2009-05-15 22:03:04
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: BUG #4796: Recovery followed by backup creates unrecoverable WAL-file

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group