RE: Stronger safeguard for archive recovery not to miss data
Takamichi Osumi (Fujitsu) <osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com>
From: "osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com" <osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com>
To: 'Laurenz Albe' <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>, 'Kyotaro Horiguchi' <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2021-01-25T08:19:54Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Attachments
- stronger_safeguard_for_archive_recovery_v04.patch (application/octet-stream) patch v4
Hi On Monday, January 25, 2021 5:13 AM Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> wrote: > On Thu, 2021-01-21 at 15:30 +0100, I wrote: > > On Thu, 2021-01-21 at 13:09 +0000, osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com wrote: > > > > > > My vote is that we should not have a GUC for such an unlikely > > > > event, and that stopping recovery is good enough. > > > OK. IIUC, my current patch for this fix doesn't need to be changed or > withdrawn. > > > Thank you for your explanation. > > > > Well, that's just my opinion. > > > > Fujii Masao seemed to disagree with the patch, and his voice carries weight. > > I think you should pst another patch where the second, now superfluous, error > message is removed. Updated. This patch showed no failure during regression tests and has been aligned by pgindent. Best Regards, Takamichi Osumi
Commits
-
Fix test added by commit 9de9294b0c.
- 8ee9b662daa6 14.0 landed
-
Stop archive recovery if WAL generated with wal_level=minimal is found.
- 9de9294b0c4d 14.0 landed