On Jan 22, 2009, at 10:18 AM, Albe Laurenz wrote:
"The archive command should generally be designed to refuse to
overwrite any pre-existing archive file."
...
The server received a fast shutdown request while a WAL segment was
being archived.
The archiver stopped and left behind a half-written archive file.
Now when the server was restarted, the archiver tried to archive
the same
WAL segment again and got an error because the destination file
already
existed.
That means that WAL archiving is stuck until somebody manually removes
the partial archived file.
I suggest that the documentation be changed so that it does not
recommend this setup. WAL segment names are unique anyway.
What is your opinion? Is the problem I encountered a corner case
that should be ignored?
The test is recommended because if you accidentally set two different
clusters to archive to the same location you'll trash everything. I
don't know of a good work-around; IIRC we used to leave the archive
command to complete, but that could seriously delay shutdown so it
was changed. I don't think we created an option to control that
behavior.
--
Decibel!, aka Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect deci...@decibel.org
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
