Re: Online base backup from the hot-standby

From: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Jun Ishiduka <ishizuka(dot)jun(at)po(dot)ntts(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, ssinger_pg(at)sympatico(dot)ca, cedric(dot)villemain(dot)debian(at)gmail(dot)com, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, magnus(at)hagander(dot)net, heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com
Subject: Re: Online base backup from the hot-standby
Date: 2011-09-22 13:24:51
Message-ID: CAHGQGwEQpF2nY1CTZkioXu=ifZtVTjF0dq_RiqJUzu7MGOACjw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 11:50 AM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> 2011/9/13 Jun Ishiduka <ishizuka(dot)jun(at)po(dot)ntts(dot)co(dot)jp>:
>>
>> Update patch.
>>
>> Changes:
>>  * set 'on' full_page_writes by user (in document)
>>  * read "FROM: XX" in backup_label (in xlog.c)
>>  * check status when pg_stop_backup is executed (in xlog.c)
>
> Thanks for updating the patch.
>
> Before reviewing the patch, to encourage people to comment and
> review the patch, I explain what this patch provides:

Attached is the updated version of the patch. I refactored the code, fixed
some bugs, added lots of source code comments, improved the document,
but didn't change the basic design. Please check this patch, and let's use
this patch as the base if you agree with that.

In the current patch, there is no safeguard for preventing users from
taking backup during recovery when FPW is disabled. This is unsafe.
Are you planning to implement such a safeguard?

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center

Attachment Content-Type Size
standby_online_backup_08_fujii.patch text/x-patch 35.0 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2011-09-22 13:27:21 Re: [v9.2] make_greater_string() does not return a string in some cases
Previous Message Robert Haas 2011-09-22 13:20:42 Re: Adding CORRESPONDING to Set Operations