Re: PITR Backups

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: "Dan Gorman" <dgorman(at)hi5(dot)com>, "Koichi Suzuki" <suzuki(dot)koichi(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, "Toru SHIMOGAKI" <shimogaki(dot)toru(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PITR Backups
Date: 2007-06-25 17:10:45
Message-ID: 974.1182791445@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

"Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> Reformatting and sorting, we have
>>
>> WARNING: page 28900 of relation 1663/16384/76718 was uninitialized
>> WARNING: page 28902 of relation 1663/16384/76718 was uninitialized

>> WARNING: page 26706 of relation 1663/16384/76719 was uninitialized
>> WARNING: page 26708 of relation 1663/16384/76719 was uninitialized

> Those two are interesting because we appear to have two valid pages in
> the middle of some uninitialized ones. That implies were not looking at
> an unapplied truncation.

Not necessarily --- it's possible the WAL sequence simply didn't touch
those pages.

Your suggestion to rerun the recovery with higher log_min_messages
is a good one, because that way we'd get some detail about what the
WAL records that touched the pages were. I think DEBUG1 would be
sufficient for that, though, and DEBUG2 might be pretty durn verbose.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dan Gorman 2007-06-25 17:10:55 Re: PITR Backups
Previous Message Gregory Stark 2007-06-25 17:07:24 Re: PITR Backups