Re: pg_xlog -> pg_xjournal?

From: Joel Jacobson <joel(at)trustly(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_xlog -> pg_xjournal?
Date: 2015-05-31 20:44:54
Message-ID: CAASwCXcWXQboLO=Nzs7DD0Tg45=xd9bEFSSsKDVR20U4XgNHfg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 7:46 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Hm. I think the impact on third-party backup tools would be rather bad,
> but there's a simple modification of the idea that might fix that:
> just always create pg_xlog as a symlink to pg_xjournal during initdb.
> Anybody who blindly removes pg_xlog won't have done anything
> irreversible. We could deprecate pg_xlog and stop creating the symlink
> after a few releases, once third-party tools have had a reasonable
> amount of time to adjust.

I like the solution. Simple and effective.
+1

> In the end though, this is a lot of thrashing for a problem that
> only comes up rarely ...

It happens often enough for the problem to be the first mentioned
use-case of pg_resetxlog at Stack Overflow:

"pg_resetxlog is a tool of last resort for getting your database
running again after:
1. You deleted files you shouldn't have from pg_xlog;"

(http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12897429/what-does-pg-resetxlog-do-and-how-does-it-work)

Preventing failure in the case of faults is of course one of the
primary objectives of any database.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2015-05-31 22:08:03 Re: nested loop semijoin estimates
Previous Message Andres Freund 2015-05-31 20:16:29 Re: [CORE] postpone next week's release