| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Why we really need timelines *now* in PITR |
| Date: | 2004-07-22 00:40:19 |
| Message-ID: | 23726.1090456819@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> PITR should cope with these scenarios. These are described reasonably
> closely but not as exact mechanical tests, so as to ensure that if
> multiple solutions exist to these recovery scenarios that all paths are
> tested.
> [ snip ... ]
Now *my* head is hurting ;-)
AFAICS, we should be able to handle all of these cases, as long as
(a) the DBA doesn't manually delete any xlog files (else he probably
loses the chance to recover to the associated timeline), and
(b) the DBA doesn't screw up on picking which timeline to recover to.
I'd guess that (b) is likely to be the bigger threat :-(.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2004-07-22 00:41:01 | Re: PreallocXlogFiles |
| Previous Message | Mark Kirkwood | 2004-07-22 00:39:59 | Re: PITR COPY Failure (was Point in Time Recovery) |