On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 01:16:08PM -0700, Jeff Janes wrote: > On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 3:23 AM, MauMau <maumau...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello, > > The PostgreSQL documentation describes cp (on UNIX/Linux) or copy (on > Windows) as an example for archive_command. However, cp/copy does not > sync > the copied data to disk. As a result, the completed WAL segments would be > lost in the following sequence: > > 1. A WAL segment fills up. > > 2. The archiver process archives the just filled WAL segment using > archive_command. That is, cp/copy reads the WAL segment file from > pg_xlog/ > and writes to the archive area. At this point, the WAL file is not > persisted to the archive area yet, because cp/copy doesn't sync the > writes. > > 3. The checkpoint processing removes the WAL segment file from pg_xlog/. > > > Note that it takes two checkpoints for this to happen, at least as currently > coded. > > Also, if the system crashed badly enough to need media recovery, rather than > just automatic crash recovery, some lost transactions are expected. Although > this could silently break your PITR chain, of a crash happened and automatic > recover used the copy in pg_xlog (which of course was synced) , while copy in > the archive was not synced.
That is one good reason to keep checkpoint_warning=30, so the typical file system sync that happens every 30 seconds warns that those files might not on permanent storage. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers