| From: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Michael Banck <mbanck(at)gmx(dot)net>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
| Subject: | Re: Use of backup_label not noted in log |
| Date: | 2024-01-29 14:03:19 |
| Message-ID: | 8b2a80c1-c41a-4168-adec-7006eab4348c@pgmasters.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 1/28/24 20:09, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 12:08:46PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Well, I'm OK with this consensus on 1d35f705e if folks think this is
>> useful enough for all the stable branches.
>
> I have done that down to REL_15_STABLE for now as this is able to
> apply cleanly there. Older branches have a lack of information here,
> actually, because read_backup_label() does not return the TLI
> retrieved from the start WAL segment, so we don't have the whole
> package of information.
I took a pass at this on PG14 and things definitely look a lot different
back there. Not only is the timeline missing, but there are two sections
of code for ending a backup, one for standby backup and one for primary.
I'm satisfied with the back patches as they stand, unless anyone else
wants to have a look.
Regards,
-David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2024-01-29 14:09:57 | Re: Wrong buffer limits check |
| Previous Message | Junwang Zhao | 2024-01-29 13:58:55 | Re: UUID v7 |