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

From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: 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 backup creates unrecoverable WAL-file
Date: 2009-05-07 17:42:02
Message-ID: 4A031D6A.4050605@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers

Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-05-07 at 18:57 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> I don't see any user error here.
>
> Just observing that the error occurs because we rely on a file being
> there when we haven't even documented that it needs to be there for it
> to work. File deletion with %r from the archive would not have removed
> that file at that point. We should have an explicit statement about
> which files can be deleted from the archive and which should not be, but
> in general it is dangerous to remove files that have not been explicitly
> described as removable.

When you create a new base backup, you shouldn't need any files archived
before starting the backup. You might not even have had archiving
enabled before that, or you might change archive_command to archive into
a new location before tarting the backup.

--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message saudraix 2009-05-08 01:10:05 BUG #4797: Uninstall : impossible to delete some files (base...)
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2009-05-07 17:33:23 Re: [HACKERS] Re: BUG #4796: Recovery followed by backup creates unrecoverable WAL-file

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David E. Wheeler 2009-05-07 17:50:13 Re: Some 8.4 changes needed according to pg_migrator testing
Previous Message Kevin Grittner 2009-05-07 17:39:25 Re: Serializable Isolation without blocking