| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, zxwsbg12138(at)gmail(dot)com, david(dot)zhang(at)highgo(dot)ca, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Subject: | Re: Requiring recovery.signal or standby.signal when recovering with a backup_label |
| Date: | 2023-11-09 03:16:52 |
| Message-ID: | ZUxPJLzr6HSe_PdR@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 09, 2023 at 12:04:19PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Sure, sorry for the confusion. By "we'd do nothing", I mean precirely
> "to take no specific action related to archive recovery and recovery
> parameters at the end of recovery", meaning that a combination of
> backup_label with no signal file would be the same as crash recovery,
> replaying WAL up to the end of what can be found in pg_wal/, and only
> that.
By being slightly more precise. I also mean to fail recovery if it is
not possible to replay up to the end-of-backup LSN marked in the label
file because we are missing some stuff in pg_wal/, which is something
that the code is currently able to handle.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2023-11-09 03:25:53 | Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2023-11-09 03:04:19 | Re: Requiring recovery.signal or standby.signal when recovering with a backup_label |