From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masao Fujii <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Archive recovery won't be completed on some situation. |
Date: | 2014-04-16 14:43:41 |
Message-ID: | CA+Tgmob8tSB796j33KE1PcpXxLe5R=epDnFFFJdKjPsA_UJNMg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 2:52 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
<horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> Hello, thank you for the discussion.
>
> At Tue, 1 Apr 2014 11:41:20 -0400, Robert Haas wrote
>>> I don't find that very radical at all. The backup_label file is
>>> *supposed* to be removed on the master if it crashes during the
>>> backup; and it should never be removed from the backup itself. At
>>> least that's how I understand it. Unfortunately, people too often
>
> The code indeed seems to assume that, and I couldn't think of any
> measure to avoid that dead-end once recovery sequence reads
> backup label accidentially left behind. I thought up to remove
> backup label during immediate shutdown on prvious versions, like
> 9.4 does.
>
> CancelBackup does only stat-unlink-rename sequence so I think
> this doesn't obstruct immediate shutdown sequence. And this
> doesn't change any seeming behavior or interfaces just except for
> this case. What do you think about this? Isn't this also
> applicable for older versions?
I don't think we should consider changing long-established behavior in
the back-branches. The old behavior may not be ideal, but that
doesn't mean it's a bug.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2014-04-16 14:46:49 | Re: [BUG FIX] Compare returned value by socket() against PGINVALID_SOCKET instead of < 0 |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2014-04-16 14:37:12 | Re: bgworker crashed or not? |