* Heikki Linnakangas (hlinn...@iki.fi) wrote:On 05/08/2015 03:39 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 9:34 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinn...@iki.fi> wrote:
On 05/08/2015 03:25 PM, Vladimir Borodin wrote:
Seems, that pg_rewind does not account --dry-run option properly. A simple
fix
for that is attached.
No, the --dry-run takes effect later. It performs all the actions it
normally would, including reading files from the source, except for actually
writing anything in the target. See the dry-run checks in file_ops.c
Urgh, my test script had an error and I made grep only in pg_rewind.c. Sorry for noise.
Even if the patch sent is incorrect, shouldn't there be some process
bypass in updateControlFile() and createBackupLabel() in case of a
--dry-run?
They both use open_target_file() and write_target_file(), which
check for --dry-run and do nothing if it's set.
Hmm, I wonder it we should print something else than "Done!" at the
end, if run in --dry-run mode. Or give some indication around the
time it says "Rewinding from last common checkpoint at ...", that
it's running in dry-run mode and won't actually modify anything. The
progress messages are a bit alarming if you don't realize that it's
skipping all the writes.
That would be really nice.
Added comments in all places mentioned in this thread.
|
pg_rewind_dry_run_comments.patch
Description: Binary data
Wouldn't hurt to also augment that rather doom-looking "point of no
return" comment with a note that says writes won't happen if in
dry-run. :)
For my 2c anyway.
Thanks!
Stephen
--
May the force be with you…
--
May the force be with you…
|
