| From: | Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Postgres restart in the middle of exclusive backup and the presence of backup_label file |
| Date: | 2022-03-02 19:23:51 |
| Message-ID: | 621FC447.90502@anastigmatix.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 03/01/22 20:03, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> Here is a new version of the patch with the following changes:
I did not notice this earlier (sorry), but there seems to remain in
backup.sgml a programlisting example that shows a psql invocation
for pg_backup_start, then a tar command, then another psql invocation
for pg_backup_stop.
I think that was only workable for the exclusive mode, and now it is
necessary to issue pg_backup_start and pg_backup_stop in the same session.
(The 'touch backup_in_progress' business seems a bit bogus now too,
suggesting an exclusivity remembered from bygone days.)
I am not sure what a workable, simple example ought to look like.
Maybe a single psql script issuing the pg_backup_start and the
pg_backup_stop, with a tar command in between with \! ?
Several bricks shy of production-ready, but it would give the idea.
Regards,
-Chap
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2022-03-02 19:52:01 | Re: wrong fds used for refilenodes after pg_upgrade relfilenode changes Reply-To: |
| Previous Message | Jille Timmermans | 2022-03-02 19:12:20 | Re: Support for grabbing multiple consecutive values with nextval() |