Re: Postgres restart in the middle of exclusive backup and the presence of backup_label file
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn@amazon.com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM <satyanarlapuram@gmail.com>
Date: 2021-12-01T00:54:18Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 05:58:15PM -0500, David Steele wrote: > The main objections as I recall are that it is much harder for simple backup > scripts and commercial backup integrations to hold a connection to postgres > open and write the backup label separately into the backup. I don't quite understand why this argument would not hold even today, even if I'd like to think that more people are using pg_basebackup. > I did figure out how to keep the safe part of exclusive backup (not having > to maintain a connection) while removing the dangerous part (writing > backup_label into PGDATA), but it was a substantial amount of work and I > felt that it had little chance of being committed. Which was, I guess, done by storing the backup_label contents within a file different than backup_label, still maintained in the main data folder to ensure that it gets included in the backup? -- Michael
Commits
-
Remove duplicated word in comment of basebackup.c
- 83cca409edf2 15.0 landed