From: | Christophe Pettus <xof(at)thebuild(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general list <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: OK to put temp tablespace on volatile storage or to omit it from backups? |
Date: | 2013-05-01 16:17:43 |
Message-ID: | 5A52C82F-78AD-4A62-8CC5-B93E38D2815C@thebuild.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Apr 30, 2013, at 11:34 PM, Yang Zhang wrote:
> In other words, I guess, I'm asking because of Xof's comment on that blog post:
>
> "That’s true if you recreate the PG_ directory in the tablespace;
> otherwise, you get the error:
> reindexdb: reindexing of database "test" failed: ERROR: could not
> create directory "pg_tblspc/69944/PG_9.2_201204301/61884": No such
> file or directory
> However, that’s not a guaranteed feature of PostgreSQL, and I would
> never rely on it."
Well, here's the core situation: If the underlying storage for a tablespace disappears, you have to patch up the database by recreating the directory in order for the database to be operational again. This isn't a documented PostgreSQL API; it's a disaster recovery procedure. It works now, it probably will work in the future, but I don't think there's any guarantee that the procedure that works today will work tomorrow.
Thus, I really don't recommend making an operational decision that the lost of a tablespace's storage is considered something routine.
That being said, you can make it work today if it is critical that it do so.
--
-- Christophe Pettus
xof(at)thebuild(dot)com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Hastie | 2013-05-01 16:34:43 | Re: zLinux Load Testing Experience |
Previous Message | Christophe Pettus | 2013-05-01 16:13:27 | Re: OK to put temp tablespace on volatile storage or to omit it from backups? |