From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_standby -l might destory the archived file |
Date: | 2009-06-02 01:14:13 |
Message-ID: | 3f0b79eb0906011814v1fa01606xe23fdba694fd0ed4@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> If so, it might be deleted after triggering the warm-standby. But, we cannot
>> remove it because the latest xlog file which is required for normal recovery
>> might exist in it. This is another undesirable scenario. Is this problem?
>
> What recovery? In the problem case you're positing, the slave server
> has executed a checkpoint and come up live. It's never going to be
> interested in the old xlog again.
Yes, the old xlog itself is not used again. But, the *old file* might
be recycled
and used later. The case that I'm looking at is that the symlink to a temporary
area is recycled. Am I missing something?
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-06-02 01:18:23 | Re: dblink patches for comment |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-06-02 01:09:54 | Re: dblink patches for comment |