From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Hot standby, recovery infra |
Date: | 2009-01-29 07:20:58 |
Message-ID: | 1233213658.2327.2598.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2009-01-29 at 10:36 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 11:19 PM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >> I feel quite good about this patch now. Given the amount of code churn, it
> >> requires testing, and I'll read it through one more time after sleeping over
> >> it. Simon, do you see anything wrong with this?
> >
> > I also read this patch and found something odd. I apologize if I misread it..
>
> If archive recovery fails after it reaches the last valid record
> in the last unfilled WAL segment, subsequent recovery might cause
> the following fatal error. This is because minSafeStartPoint indicates
> the end of the last unfilled WAL segment which subsequent recovery
> cannot reach. Is this bug? (I'm not sure how to fix this problem
> because I don't understand yet why minSafeStartPoint is required.)
>
> > FATAL: WAL ends before end time of backup dump
I think you're right. We need a couple of changes to avoid confusing
messages.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2009-01-29 07:34:48 | Re: Hot standby, recovery infra |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2009-01-29 06:59:28 | Re: Hot standby, recovery infra |