Re: cleanup patches for incremental backup

From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: cleanup patches for incremental backup
Date: 2024-01-29 18:21:30
Message-ID: 20240129182130.GA3670200@nathanxps13
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Jan 27, 2024 at 10:31:09AM -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 27, 2024 at 11:00:01AM +0300, Alexander Lakhin wrote:
>> I'm discouraged by "\n1" in the file name and in the
>> "examining summary..." message.
>> regress_log_002_blocks from the following successful test run on the same
>> sungazer node contains:
>> [15:21:58.924](0.106s) # examining summary for TLI 1 from 0/155BAE0 to 0/155E750
>> [15:21:58.925](0.001s) ok 1 - WAL summary file exists
>
> Ah, I think this query:
>
> SELECT tli, start_lsn, end_lsn from pg_available_wal_summaries()
> WHERE tli = $summarized_tli AND end_lsn > '$summarized_lsn'
>
> is returning more than one row in some cases. I attached a quick sketch of
> an easy way to reproduce the issue as well as one way to fix it.

The buildfarm just caught a failure with the new logging in place:

https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=calliphoridae&dt=2024-01-29%2018%3A09%3A10

I'm not totally sure my "fix" is correct, but I think this does confirm the
theory.

--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrey M. Borodin 2024-01-29 18:32:38 Re: UUID v7
Previous Message Nathan Bossart 2024-01-29 18:12:49 Re: Hide exposed impl detail of wchar.c