Re: Requiring recovery.signal or standby.signal when recovering with a backup_label
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Roberto Mello <roberto.mello@gmail.com>
Cc: David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, zxwsbg12138@gmail.com, david.zhang@highgo.ca
Date: 2023-10-31T00:42:18Z
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 →
-
Delay recovery mode LOG after reading backup_label and/or checkpoint record
- dc5bd3889437 17.0 landed
-
Mention standby.signal in FATALs for checkpoint record missing at recovery
- 1ffdc03c21ae 17.0 landed
-
XLOG file archiving and point-in-time recovery. There are still some
- 66ec2db72840 8.0.0 cited
On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 10:32:28AM -0600, Roberto Mello wrote: > I realize the original use of "touch" is a valid shortcut for what I > suggest above, however that will be less clear for the not-so-un*x-inclined > users of Postgres, while for some it'll be downright confusing, IMHO. It > also provides the advantage of being crystal clear on what needs to be done > to fix the problem. Indeed, "touch" may be better in this path if we'd throw an ERROR to enforce a given policy, and that's more consistent with the rest of the area. -- Michael