| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Morris Goldstein" <morris(dot)x(dot)goldstein(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Can't connect (2 dbs) or login (2 others) |
| Date: | 2007-09-23 03:19:44 |
| Message-ID: | 8146.1190517584@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Morris Goldstein" <morris(dot)x(dot)goldstein(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I looked at the pg_resetxlog documentation and have a question. Here
> is output from pg_resetxlog -n:
[ snipped to just the non-constant numbers ]
> Current log file ID: 0
> Next log file segment: 1
> Latest checkpoint's StartUpID: 12
> Latest checkpoint's NextXID: 536
> Latest checkpoint's NextOID: 17142
Ick. This looks *exactly* like what pg_control would contain
immediately after initdb, in a 7.4 database. I suppose that someone
tried an initdb as a recovery method, without understanding the
consequences.
> Is it safe to run pg_resetxlog without the -l argument?
No, or at least it will not improve your situation. All those numbers
need to be higher, probably a lot higher. See the advice in the
pg_resetxlog man page about deriving reasonable values.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | cbrazvan | 2007-09-23 04:27:14 | Re: Unique is non unique; no nulls |
| Previous Message | Morris Goldstein | 2007-09-23 01:44:06 | Re: Can't connect (2 dbs) or login (2 others) |