| From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | shihao zhong <zhong950419(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Manu <manuelreyesbravo(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ayush Tiwari <ayushtiwari(dot)slg01(at)gmail(dot)com>, Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Incremental backup can use a summary past a timeline switch |
| Date: | 2026-11-01 15:31:19 |
| Message-ID: | CAHGQGwGH0=VjH5qVbY4GvK2dvXE43tmGg8WXjqciWe+Y+m0-rA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Nov 1, 2026 at 9:56 AM shihao zhong <zhong950419(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> +1 to commit this patch first.
I've pushed the patch. Thanks!
> It does not cover one more case. If the recovery target is not at a
> checkpoint redo, a timeline 1 summary can go past the switch point,
> and a truncation after that point still drops blocks. This is the
> case from the "Assertion failure in WAL summarizer" thread [1], and
> Manu's 0002 there fixes it on top of this patch.
>
> [1] https://postgr.es/m/179296590548.3326877.13182798945037392623@gmail.com
Yes, I'm planning to work on that.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2026-11-01 15:56:54 | Re: [PG19] Three bugs with a CHECK constraint that only the child enforces |
| Previous Message | shihao zhong | 2026-11-01 14:47:45 | Re: Proposal: Conflict log history table for Logical Replication |