Horton

Re: Postgres restart in the middle of exclusive backup and the presence of backup_label file

Nathan Bossart <bossartn@amazon.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn@amazon.com>
To: David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>, Euler Taveira <euler@eulerto.com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM <satyanarlapuram@gmail.com>
Date: 2022-01-07T18:17:29Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 1/7/22, 5:52 AM, "David Steele" <david@pgmasters.net> wrote:
> On 1/6/22 20:20, Euler Taveira wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 6, 2022, at 9:48 PM, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
>>> After a quick glance, I didn't see an easy way to hold a session open
>>> while the test does other things.  If there isn't one, modifying
>>> backup_fs_hot() to work with non-exclusive mode might be more trouble
>>> than it is worth.
>>
>> You can use IPC::Run to start psql in background. See examples in
>> src/test/recovery.
>
> I don't think updating backup_fs_hot() is worth it here.
>
> backup_fs_cold() works just fine for this case and if there is a need
> for backup_fs_hot() in the future it can be implemented as needed.

Thanks for the pointer on IPC::Run.  I had a feeling I was missing
something obvious!

I think I agree with David that it still isn't worth it for just this
one test.  Of course, it would be great to test the non-exclusive
backup logic as much as possible, but I'm not sure that this
particular test will provide any sort of meaningful coverage.

Nathan

Commits

  1. Remove duplicated word in comment of basebackup.c