On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry for resurrecting an old argument.
> http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/200812051441.mb5efg1m007...@wwwmaster.postgresql.org
>
> I got the complaint about this behavior of the current pg_stop_backup()
> in this morning. I thought that this is the bug, and created the patch.
> But it was rejected because its change might break the existing app.
> Though I'm not sure if there is really such an app. Anyway I think that
> something like the following statements should be added into the document.
> Thought?
>
> ------------
> Note that the WAL file name in the backup history file cannot be used
> to determine which WAL files are required for the backup. Because it
> indicates the subsequent WAL file of the starting or ending one for
> the backup, when its location is exactly at a WAL file boundary (What
> is worse, sometimes it indicates a nonexistent WAL file).
> ------------
Here is the patch that adds the above-mentioned note. I think this
should be back-patched up to 8.0. Thought?
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
*** a/doc/src/sgml/backup.sgml
--- b/doc/src/sgml/backup.sgml
***************
*** 859,864 **** SELECT pg_stop_backup();
--- 859,869 ----
If you used the label to identify the associated dump file,
then the archived history file is enough to tell you which dump file to
restore.
+ Note that the WAL file name in the backup history file cannot be used
+ to determine which WAL files are required for the backup. Because it
+ indicates the subsequent WAL file of the starting or ending one for
+ the backup, when its location is exactly at a WAL file boundary (What
+ is worse, sometimes it indicates a nonexistent WAL file).
</para>
<para>
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
