Horton

Re: backup manifests

Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>

View thread
From: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>, David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, Suraj Kharage <suraj.kharage@enterprisedb.com>, tushar <tushar.ahuja@enterprisedb.com>, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi <rajkumar.raghuwanshi@enterprisedb.com>, Rushabh Lathia <rushabh.lathia@gmail.com>, Tels <nospam-pg-abuse@bloodgate.com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Jeevan Chalke <jeevan.chalke@enterprisedb.com>, vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>
Date: 2020-03-30T19:16:31Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Try to avoid compiler warnings in optimized builds.

  2. Fix option related issues in pg_verifybackup.

  3. Add index term for backup manifest in documentation.

  4. Code review for backup manifest.

  5. Document the backup manifest file format.

  6. Fix typo in pg_validatebackup documentation.

  7. Exclude backup_manifest file that existed in database, from BASE_BACKUP.

  8. Msys2 tweaks for pg_validatebackup corruption test

  9. Fix resource management bug with replication=database.

  10. Be more careful about time_t vs. pg_time_t in basebackup.c.

  11. pg_validatebackup: Fix 'make clean' to remove tmp_check.

  12. pg_validatebackup: Also use perl2host in TAP tests.

  13. Generate backup manifests for base backups, and validate them.

  14. Add checksum helper functions.

  15. pg_waldump: Add a --quiet option.

  16. Catversion bump for b9b408c48724

  17. pg_basebackup: Refactor code for reading COPY and tar data.

  18. Use a ResourceOwner to track buffer pins in all cases.

  19. Use ARMv8 CRC instructions where available.

  20. Logical replication support for initial data copy

  21. Use Intel SSE 4.2 CRC instructions where available.

  22. Switch to CRC-32C in WAL and other places.

  23. Remove support for 64-bit CRC.

  24. Change CRCs in WAL records from 64bit to 32bit for performance reasons.

Hi,

On 2020-03-30 15:04:55 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> I guess I'd like to be clear here that I have no fundamental
> disagreement with taking this tool in any direction that people would
> like it to go. For me it's just a question of timing. Feature freeze
> is now a week or so away, and nothing complicated is going to get done
> in that time. If we can all agree on something simple based on
> Andres's recent proposal, cool, but I'm not yet sure that will be the
> case, so what's plan B? We could decide that what I have here is just
> too little to be a viable facility on its own, but I think Stephen is
> the only one taking that position. We could release it as
> pg_validatemanifest with a plan to rename it if other backup-related
> checks are added later. We could release it as pg_validatebackup with
> the idea to avoid having to rename it when more backup-related checks
> are added later, but with a greater possibility of confusion in the
> meantime and no hard guarantee that anyone will actually develop such
> checks. We could put it in to pg_checksums, but I think that's really
> backing ourselves into a corner: if backup validation develops other
> checks that are not checksum-related, what then? I'd much rather
> gamble on keeping things together by topic (backup) than technology
> used internally (checksum). Putting it into pg_basebackup is another
> option, and would avoid that problem, but it's not my preferred
> option, because as I noted before, I think the command-line options
> will get confusing.

I'm mildly inclined to name it pg_validate, pg_validate_dbdir or
such. And eventually (definitely not this release) subsume pg_checksums
in it. That way we can add other checkers too.

I don't really see a point in ending up with lots of different commands
over time. Partially because there's probably plenty checks where the
overall cost can be drastically reduced by combining IO. Partially
because there's probably plenty shareable infrastructure. And partially
because I think it makes discovery for users a lot easier.

Greetings,

Andres Freund