| From: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: Use of backup_label not noted in log |
| Date: | 2023-11-21 07:42:42 |
| Message-ID: | c10beaebedf02574db22a2a3bd3dbcf791db6ba5.camel@cybertec.at |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2023-11-20 at 11:03 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> > If we add a message for starting with "backup_label", shouldn't
> > we also add a corresponding message for starting from a checkpoint
> > found in the control file? If you see that in a problem report,
> > you immediately know what is going on.
>
> Maybe - the reason I hesitate on that is that emitting an additional log
> message when starting from a base backup just adds something "once once the
> lifetime of a node". Whereas emitting something every start obviously doesn't
> impose any limit.
The message should only be shown if PostgreSQL replays WAL, that is,
after a crash. That would (hopefully) make it a rare message too.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Drouvot, Bertrand | 2023-11-21 07:43:16 | Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2023-11-21 07:09:17 | Re: remaining sql/json patches |