| From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, valgog <valgog(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Re: BUG #5602: Recovering from Hot-Standby file backup leads to the currupted indexes |
| Date: | 2010-08-12 07:29:57 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTin1Y3i4NN7crUZtY3vpYZ0Wz9SByOoRXat2bnT6@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> What was bothering me about the procedure is that it's not clear when
> the new slave has reached consistency, in the sense of having used WAL
> to clean up any out-of-sync conditions in the base backup it was started
> from. So you can't be sure when it's okay to begin treating it as a
> trustworthy backup or potential master. We track the minimum safe
> recovery point for normal PITR recovery cases, but that mechanism isn't
> available for slaves cloned according to this procedure. So the DBA is
> just flying blind as to whether the slave is trustworthy yet. I can't
> prove that that's what burnt the original complainant, but it fits the
> symptoms.
The step 2 of the procedure can ensure that new slave has reached
consistency. No?
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2010-08-12 07:43:47 | Re: Re: BUG #5602: Recovering from Hot-Standby file backup leads to the currupted indexes |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-08-12 07:18:06 | Re: Re: BUG #5602: Recovering from Hot-Standby file backup leads to the currupted indexes |