Re: log messages for archive recovery progress

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Satoshi Nagayasu <snaga(at)uptime(dot)jp>, Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: log messages for archive recovery progress
Date: 2012-01-12 14:13:24
Message-ID: CA+TgmoZqP1pyveGbe8Cu-4XCnZjXNfzSX2sOwxjBg5gO9jXwAA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Satoshi Nagayasu <snaga(at)uptime(dot)jp> wrote:
>
>> However, I'm a bit afraid that it will confuse DBA if we use
>> "restored" under the pg_xlog replay context, because we have
>> already used "restored" that means a WAL file as successfully
>> "copied" (not "replayed") from archive directory into pg_xlog
>> directory under the archive recovery context.
>>
>> So, to determine the status of copying WAL files from
>> archive directory, I think we can use "restored", or
>> "could not restore" on failure.
>>
>> And to determine the status of replaying WAL files
>> in pg_xlog directory (even if a WAL is copied from archive),
>> we have to use "recover" or "replay".
>
> Agreed. I can change "restored" to "using", so we have two message types
>
> LOG:  restored log file "000000080000000000000047" from archive
> LOG:  using pre-existing log file "000000080000000000000047" from pg_xlog

using seems pretty fuzzy to me. replaying?

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2012-01-12 14:59:45 pgbench post-connection command
Previous Message Joey Adams 2012-01-12 14:00:51 Re: JSON for PG 9.2