| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, tomas(at)tuxteam(dot)de, "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: File system snapshots for multiple file systems |
| Date: | 2008-04-08 19:26:16 |
| Message-ID: | 6256.1207682776@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> Whether it's a good idea or not is a bit debatable though. I'm
>> concerned about the WAL partition filling up (--> PANIC), especially
>> if you forget to pg_stop_backup after getting your backup.
> We check if pg_start_backup in effect when we an ENOSPC error on the WAL
> partition and if so turn it off, clean old WAL segments, and march on.
> The major concern being that someone might have a bad backup. pg_stop_backup()
> could scream but they might not notice. Not sure how much more we could do
> about that.
Not putting in the foot-gun in the first place is what we could do about
it.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2008-04-08 19:26:34 | Re: [PATCHES] libpq type system 0.9a |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-04-08 19:22:05 | Re: [PATCHES] libpq type system 0.9a |