Re: backup manifests
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Commits
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Try to avoid compiler warnings in optimized builds.
- 05021a2c0cd2 13.0 landed
-
Fix option related issues in pg_verifybackup.
- 0a89e93bfaa6 13.0 landed
-
Add index term for backup manifest in documentation.
- 4db819ba4039 13.0 landed
-
Code review for backup manifest.
- a2ac73e7be7a 13.0 landed
-
Document the backup manifest file format.
- 149f2ae88ab0 13.0 landed
-
Fix typo in pg_validatebackup documentation.
- c4f82a779d26 13.0 landed
-
Exclude backup_manifest file that existed in database, from BASE_BACKUP.
- 1ec50a81ec0a 13.0 landed
-
Msys2 tweaks for pg_validatebackup corruption test
- c3e4cbaab936 13.0 landed
-
Fix resource management bug with replication=database.
- 3e0d80fd8d3d 13.0 cited
-
Be more careful about time_t vs. pg_time_t in basebackup.c.
- db1531cae009 13.0 cited
-
pg_validatebackup: Fix 'make clean' to remove tmp_check.
- 9f8f881caa0f 13.0 landed
-
pg_validatebackup: Also use perl2host in TAP tests.
- 460314db08e8 13.0 landed
-
Generate backup manifests for base backups, and validate them.
- 0d8c9c1210c4 13.0 landed
-
Add checksum helper functions.
- c12e43a2e0d4 13.0 landed
-
pg_waldump: Add a --quiet option.
- ac44367efbef 13.0 landed
-
Catversion bump for b9b408c48724
- afb5465e0cfc 13.0 cited
-
pg_basebackup: Refactor code for reading COPY and tar data.
- 431ba7bebf13 13.0 landed
-
Use a ResourceOwner to track buffer pins in all cases.
- 3cb646264e8c 12.0 cited
-
Use ARMv8 CRC instructions where available.
- f044d71e331d 11.0 cited
-
Logical replication support for initial data copy
- 7c4f52409a8c 10.0 cited
-
Use Intel SSE 4.2 CRC instructions where available.
- 3dc2d62d0486 9.5.0 cited
-
Switch to CRC-32C in WAL and other places.
- 5028f22f6eb0 9.5.0 cited
-
Remove support for 64-bit CRC.
- 404bc51cde9d 9.5.0 cited
-
Change CRCs in WAL records from 64bit to 32bit for performance reasons.
- 21fda22ec46d 8.1.0 cited
Greetings, * Andres Freund (andres@anarazel.de) wrote: > On 2020-03-27 16:57:46 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > > I really don't know what to say to this. WAL is absolutely critical to > > a backup being valid. pgBackRest doesn't have a way to *just* validate > > a backup today, unfortunately, but we're planning to support it in the > > future and we will absolutely include in that validation checking all of > > the WAL that's part of the backup. > > Could you please address the fact that just about everybody uses base > backups + later WAL to have a short data loss window? Integrating the > WAL files necessary to make the base backup consistent doesn't achieve > much if we can't verify the WAL files afterwards. And fairly obviously > pg_basebackup can't do much about WAL created after its invocation. I feel like we have very different ideas about what "just about everybody" does here. In my view, folks use pg_basebackup because it's easy and they can create self-contained backups that include all the WAL needed to get the backup up and running again and they don't typically care about PITR all that much. Folks who care about PITR use something that manages WAL for them, which pg_basebackup and pg_receivewal really don't do and it's not easy to add scripting around them to figure out what WAL is needed for what backup, etc. If we didn't think that the ability to create a self-contained backup was useful, it sure seems odd that we've done a lot to make that work (having both fetch and stream modes for it) and that it's the default. > Given that we need something separate to address that "verification > hole", I don't see why it's useful to have a special case solution (or > rather multiple ones, for stream and fetch) inside pg_basebackup. Well, the proposal up-thread would end up with almost zero changes to pg_basebackup itself, but, yes, there'd be changes to BASE_BACKUP and different ones for STREAMING_REPLICATION to support getting the WAL checksums into the manifest. Thanks, Stephen