From: | pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Stephan Szabo" <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com, "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, "Kouber Saparev" <postgresql(at)saparev(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Help me recovering data |
Date: | 2005-02-16 17:32:24 |
Message-ID: | 16742.24.91.171.78.1108575144.squirrel@mail.mohawksoft.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> writes:
>> Right, but since the how to resolve it currently involves executing a
>> query, simply stopping dead won't allow you to resolve it. Also, if we
>> stop at the exact wraparound point, can we run into problems actually
>> trying to do the vacuum if that's still the resolution technique?
>
> We'd have to do something with a fair amount of slop. The idea I was
> toying with just now involved a forcible shutdown once we get within
> say 100,000 transactions of a wrap failure; but apply this check only
> when in interactive operation. This would allow the DBA to perform
> the needed VACUUMing manually in a standalone backend.
>
> The real question here is exactly how large a cluestick do you want to
> hit the DBA with. I don't think we can "guarantee" no data loss with
> anything less than forced shutdown, but that's not so much a cluestick
> as a clue howitzer.
I think a DBA or accidental DBA would prefer stating in a meeting:
"Yea, the database shut down because I didn't perform normal maintenence,
its fixed now and we have a script in place so it won't happen again"
Over
"Yea, the database lost all its data and we have to restore from our last
backup because I didn't perform normal maintenence."
One gets a "boy are you lucky" over a "you're fired."
>
> Maybe
>
> (a) within 200,000 transactions of wrap, every transaction start
> delivers a WARNING message;
>
> (b) within 100,000 transactions, forced shutdown as above.
I agree.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-02-16 17:33:38 | Re: Design notes for BufMgrLock rewrite |
Previous Message | pgsql | 2005-02-16 17:25:44 | Re: Help me recovering data |