Re: OK to put temp tablespace on volatile storage or to omit it from backups?

On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 7:14 PM, Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> 2013/5/1 Yang Zhang <yanghatespam(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>
>> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 5:31 PM, Darren Duncan <darren(at)darrenduncan(dot)net> wrote:
>>> On 2013.04.30 4:55 PM, Yang Zhang wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I would intuit that it's fine, but I just want to make sure there are
>>>> no gotchas from a recovery point of view:
>>>>
>>>> If I were to lose my temp tablespace upon system crash, would this
>>>> prevent proper crash recovery?
>>>>
>>>> Also, if I were to omit the temp tablespace from the base backup,
>>>> would that prevent proper backup recovery?
>>>
>>>
>>> Although it would be nice if what you said would work, I read in a recent
>>> blog post that losing any tablespace would prevent the database server from
>>> starting, even if it was only for temporary things. -- Darren Duncan
>>
>> That is unfortunate. Good thing I asked, I guess. Do you have a
>> pointer to said blog post?
>
> I think this is the post in question:
>
> http://thebuild.com/blog/2013/03/10/you-cannot-recover-from-the-loss-of-a-tablespace/
>
> (BTW please try not to top-post :) )

Argh, trying not to. Old habits die hard.

The comments suggest recovery from a lost tablespace is possible.

If anyone has any details or even pointers, I'd love to dig deeper,
since this would yield some nice and economical performance gains for
us on EC2.