Re: PITR backup history files with identical 2nd part file names

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Rafael Martinez <r(dot)m(dot)guerrero(at)usit(dot)uio(dot)no>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PITR backup history files with identical 2nd part file names
Date: 2010-01-21 22:06:08
Message-ID: 14739.1264111568@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Rafael Martinez <r(dot)m(dot)guerrero(at)usit(dot)uio(dot)no> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think this is normal behavior now, if you have an unloaded server.
>> pg_start_backup now forces a segment switch, so if nothing much else is
>> happening it's quite likely that the recorded start point will be the
>> beginning of the WAL segment (plus the page header size).

> The strange thing is that a lot is happening. These clusters generate
> several hundred WAL files a day.

Well, by "loaded server" I meant "something sufficient busy to generate
another WAL record in the extremely narrow time window between when
pg_start_backup advances the WAL pointer and when it copies the WAL
pointer". It might even be that those two things happen within a single
acquisition of WALInsertLock and thus there isn't any window at all ---
I didn't dig into the code closely enough to be sure about that.

> I trust what you say on the subject :-) .... is only that in all the
> years we have been using PITR, we have never seen identical values in
> the 2nd part of the backup history file name (not one)

Well, it was a pretty recent change that made pg_start_backup force
a segment switch. Before that you'd have seen values ranging throughout
the size of a WAL segment.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2010-01-21 22:06:25 Re: primary key error message
Previous Message Eric B. Ridge 2010-01-21 22:02:51 Re: 8.5 vs. 9.0, Postgres vs. PostgreSQL