Re: Allow WAL information to recover corrupted pg_controldata
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila@huawei.com>
Cc: "'Alvaro Herrera'" <alvherre@commandprompt.com>, 'Cédric Villemain' <cedric@2ndquadrant.com>, "'Pg Hackers'" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, "'Robert Haas'" <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Date: 2012-06-19T05:43:18Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Amit Kapila <amit.kapila@huawei.com> writes: >> AFAIR you can create pg_control from scratch already with pg_resetxlog. >> The hard part is coming up with values for the counters, such as the >> next WAL location. Some of them such as next OID are pretty harmless >> if you don't guess right, but I'm worried that wrong next WAL could >> make things worse not better. > I believe if WAL files are proper as mentioned in Alvaro's mail, the > purposed logic should generate correct values. I've got a problem with the assumption that, when pg_control is trash, megabytes or gigabytes of WAL can still be relied on completely. I'm almost inclined to suggest that we not get next-LSN from WAL, but by scanning all the pages in the main data store and computing the max observed LSN. This is clearly not very attractive from a performance standpoint, but it would avoid the obvious failure mode where you lost some recent WAL segments along with pg_control. regards, tom lane