On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Amit Langote <amitlangot...@gmail.com> wrote: > A PostgreSQL user recently reported on pgsql-admin about an issue: > when he changed wal_level from 'minimal' to 'hot_standby', the WAL > segment sequence rewound, that is, it started using old names. A > snippet of his "ls -lrt pg_xlog": > > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 12:13 000000010000000F000000B3 > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 12:13 00000001000000100000000A > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 12:13 000000010000001000000036 > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 12:13 000000010000001000000008 > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 12:13 000000010000000F000000F6 > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 12:13 000000010000000F000000E4 > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 12:13 000000010000000F000000F2 > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 12:13 000000010000001000000003 > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 12:13 000000010000000F000000D5 > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 12:13 000000010000000F000000A9 > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 12:13 000000010000000F000000D6 > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 12:13 00000001000000100000004E > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 12:13 000000010000000F000000D8 > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 12:13 000000010000000F000000B4 > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 12:13 000000010000000F000000BA > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 12:13 000000010000000F000000C3 > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 12:13 000000010000001000000071 > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 12:13 000000010000001000000047 > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 12:13 000000010000001000000026
I think these are the WAL files that were preallocated by WAL recycling but have not been used yet. > # WAL after wal_level changed from 'minimal' to 'hot_standby' > > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 12:27 000000010000000E0000007B > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 12:35 000000010000000E0000007C > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 276 May 21 12:35 > 000000010000000E0000007C.00000020.backup > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 14:53 000000010000000E0000007D > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 14:53 000000010000000E0000007E > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 14:53 000000010000000E0000007F > -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 May 21 14:53 000000010000000E00000080 These are the WAL files that you now used. So I don't think that WAL file sequence rewound in this case. Regards, -- Fujii Masao -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
