Re: [HACKERS] recovery getting interrupted is not so unusual as it used to be

2010-06-04 Thread Florian Pflug
On Jun 3, 2010, at 5:25 , Robert Haas wrote: On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org wrote: Oh. Well, if that's the case, then I guess I lean toward applying the patch as-is. Then there's no need for the caveat and without manual intervention. That still leaves the

Re: [HACKERS] recovery getting interrupted is not so unusual as it used to be

2010-06-04 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 8:21 PM, Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org wrote: On Jun 3, 2010, at 5:25 , Robert Haas wrote: On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org wrote: Oh.  Well, if that's the case, then I guess I lean toward applying the patch as-is.  Then there's no need for the

Re: [HACKERS] recovery getting interrupted is not so unusual as it used to be

2010-06-04 Thread Greg Stark
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 2:20 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: I've tried to keep this as similar as possible to the existing message while making it less ambiguous about cause and effect. If this has occurred more than once corrupt data might be the cause and you might need to

Re: [HACKERS] recovery getting interrupted is not so unusual as it used to be

2010-06-02 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 4:33 AM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 3:20 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: Hmm, OK, I think that makes sense.  Would you care to propose a patch? Yep. Here is the patch. This patch distinguishes normal shutdown from

Re: [HACKERS] recovery getting interrupted is not so unusual as it used to be

2010-06-02 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 02/06/10 23:50, Robert Haas wrote: First, is it appropriate to set the control file state to DB_SHUTDOWNED_IN_RECOVERY even when we're in crash recovery (as opposed to archive recovery/SR)? My vote is no, but Heikki thought it might be OK. My logic on that is: If the database is known to

Re: [HACKERS] recovery getting interrupted is not so unusual as it used to be

2010-06-02 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 5:39 PM, Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote: On 02/06/10 23:50, Robert Haas wrote: First, is it appropriate to set the control file state to DB_SHUTDOWNED_IN_RECOVERY even when we're in crash recovery (as opposed to archive recovery/SR)?  My

Re: [HACKERS] recovery getting interrupted is not so unusual as it used to be

2010-06-02 Thread Florian Pflug
On Jun 3, 2010, at 0:58 , Robert Haas wrote: But maybe the message isn't right the first time either. After all the point of having a write-ahead log in the first place is that we should be able to prevent corruption in the event of an unexpected shutdown. Maybe the right thing to do is to

Re: [HACKERS] recovery getting interrupted is not so unusual as it used to be

2010-06-02 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 9:07 PM, Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org wrote: On Jun 3, 2010, at 0:58 , Robert Haas wrote: But maybe the message isn't right the first time either.  After all the point of having a write-ahead log in the first place is that we should be able to prevent corruption in the

Re: [HACKERS] recovery getting interrupted is not so unusual as it used to be

2010-06-02 Thread Florian Pflug
On Jun 3, 2010, at 3:31 , Robert Haas wrote: On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 9:07 PM, Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org wrote: On Jun 3, 2010, at 0:58 , Robert Haas wrote: But maybe the message isn't right the first time either. After all the point of having a write-ahead log in the first place is that we

Re: [HACKERS] recovery getting interrupted is not so unusual as it used to be

2010-06-02 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org wrote: Oh.  Well, if that's the case, then I guess I lean toward applying the patch as-is.  Then there's no need for the caveat and without manual intervention. That still leaves the messages awfully ambiguous concerning the cause

Re: [HACKERS] recovery getting interrupted is not so unusual as it used to be

2010-05-25 Thread Fujii Masao
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 3:20 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: Hmm, OK, I think that makes sense.  Would you care to propose a patch? Yep. Here is the patch. This patch distinguishes normal shutdown from

Re: [HACKERS] recovery getting interrupted is not so unusual as it used to be

2010-05-25 Thread Simon Riggs
On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 19:12 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 3:20 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: Hmm, OK, I think that makes sense. Would you care to propose a patch? Yep. Here is the

Re: [HACKERS] recovery getting interrupted is not so unusual as it used to be

2010-05-25 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 12:36 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 19:12 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 3:20 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: Hmm, OK, I

Re: [HACKERS] recovery getting interrupted is not so unusual as it used to be

2010-05-14 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 1:28 AM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: Hmm, it seems this is my night to rediscover the wisdom of your previous proposals.  I think that state would only be appropriate when we

[HACKERS] recovery getting interrupted is not so unusual as it used to be

2010-05-12 Thread Robert Haas
When firing up a properly shut down HS slave, I get: LOG: database system was interrupted while in recovery at log time 2010-05-12 20:35:24 EDT HINT: If this has occurred more than once some data might be corrupted and you might need to choose an earlier recovery target. But this is kind of an

Re: [HACKERS] recovery getting interrupted is not so unusual as it used to be

2010-05-12 Thread Fujii Masao
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 10:01 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: When firing up a properly shut down HS slave, I get: LOG:  database system was interrupted while in recovery at log time 2010-05-12 20:35:24 EDT HINT:  If this has occurred more than once some data might be corrupted

Re: [HACKERS] recovery getting interrupted is not so unusual as it used to be

2010-05-12 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 11:07 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 10:01 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: When firing up a properly shut down HS slave, I get: LOG:  database system was interrupted while in recovery at log time 2010-05-12 20:35:24

Re: [HACKERS] recovery getting interrupted is not so unusual as it used to be

2010-05-12 Thread Fujii Masao
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: Hmm, it seems this is my night to rediscover the wisdom of your previous proposals.  I think that state would only be appropriate when we shutdown after reaching consistency, not any shutdown during recovery.  Do you