From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | francisco(dot)reinolds(at)channable(dot)com |
Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #17846: pg_dump doesn't properly dump with paused WAL replay |
Date: | 2023-03-16 15:10:57 |
Message-ID: | 3777456.1678979457@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
PG Bug reporting form <noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> For backups, we use pg_dump to perform a full database dump. Before we start
> a backup, we pause the WAL replay on the secondary, unpausing it after it is
> concluded. This was done since we previously encountered problems with
> pg_dump failing when an AccessExclusiveLock was held on a table that pg_dump
> was going to dump.
> For some time we faced no problems with this setup, but starting some months
> ago, we started witnessing sporadic failures when we attempted to restore
> the dumps of one of our databases, to verify the dump's integrity. These
> restore failures would occur due to a key not being present in a table:
I really have no idea what's going on there, but can you show the exact
pg_dump command(s) being issued? I'm particularly curious whether you
are using parallel dump. The same for the failing pg_restore.
Also, are all the moving parts (primary server, secondary server,
pg_dump, pg_restore) exactly the same PG version?
> We have managed, with some help from the Postgres IRC channel (special
> thanks to user nickb), to work around the problem. The solution was to begin
> a transaction, and extract a snapshot that'd be passed as a pg_dump
> argument, and only then pause WAL replay. From our understanding, pg_dump
> should already implicitly pick a suitable point to start the dump but it
> apparently is not the case, hence the bug report.
It's the other way around: the replay mechanism should not damage
any data that's visible to an open snapshot. So I agree this smells
like a bug, but we don't have enough info here to reproduce it.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | PG Bug reporting form | 2023-03-16 18:00:01 | BUG #17847: Unaligned memory access in ltree_gist |
Previous Message | jian he | 2023-03-16 14:28:27 | Re: BUG #17845: insert into on conflict bug . |