On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 1:18 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Not sure if this is exactly the right way to do it, but I agree that
> something along those lines is a good idea. I also think, maybe even
> importantly, that we should probably document that people using
> file-copy based hot backups should strongly consider removing the
> replication slots by hand before using the backup.
Good point. Something here would be adapted in this case:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/backup-file.html
I am attaching an updated patch as well.
--
Michael
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/backup.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/backup.sgml
index 854b5fd..d8286b0 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/backup.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/backup.sgml
@@ -448,6 +448,13 @@ tar -cf backup.tar /usr/local/pgsql/data
the contents of indexes for example, just the commands to recreate
them.) However, taking a file system backup might be faster.
</para>
+
+ <para>
+ When doing a file system backup, it is recommended to drop replication
+ slots (see <xref linkend="streaming-replication-slots">) before using
+ it as it is not guaranteed that the WAL files needed by a slot will be
+ kept on the newly-created node.
+ </para>
</sect1>
<sect1 id="continuous-archiving">
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/pg_basebackup.sgml
b/doc/src/sgml/ref/pg_basebackup.sgml
index 6ce0c8c..b81ad8d 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/pg_basebackup.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/ref/pg_basebackup.sgml
@@ -590,6 +590,13 @@ PostgreSQL documentation
or an older major version, down to 9.1. However, WAL streaming mode (-X
stream) only works with server version 9.3.
</para>
+
+ <para>
+ The backup will not include information about replication slots
+ (see <xref linkend="streaming-replication-slots">) as it is not
+ guaranteed that a node in recovery will have WAL files required for
+ a given slot.
+ </para>
</refsect1>
<refsect1>
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
