From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Gersner <gersner(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Unlogged Crash Detection |
Date: | 2017-08-29 14:09:41 |
Message-ID: | 20170829140941.oxdgu5b3ukutcgga@alap3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 2017-08-29 20:19:52 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 6:06 PM, Gersner <gersner(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > I see, interesting.
>
> Please do not top-post. This is not the recommended way of dealing
> with threads on this mailing list.
>
> > We have lots of unlogged tables, upon a crash we want to create a
> > feedback/alert that data disappeared.
> >
> > Not very familiar with the internal structure, but is it possible to
> > identify if the current table is the INIT_FORKNUM?
>
> Using pg_relation_filepath, you can know the path to a relation file
> on disk. So a simple idea would be to use pg_read_binary_file with the
> path of the file and the path of the init fork, which is suffixed with
> "_init", and then a comparison between both. If the data read is the
> same, the relation has been untouched.
Huh, but that's not particularly meaningful, is it? That'll just as well
be the case for a freshly created relation, no?
- Andres
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Daniel Verite | 2017-08-29 15:21:01 | Re: Create Action for psql when NOTIFY Recieved |
Previous Message | Jerry Regan | 2017-08-29 13:01:59 | Re: Create Action for psql when NOTIFY Recieved |