Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> That's not related to the -R option, the situation with config_file is the
> same with or without it. But yes, if you use config_file option to point
> outside the data directory, the config file won't be backed up. That feels
> intuitive to me, I wouldn't expect it to
On 28 March 2013 13:47, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> Therefore anybody using pg_basebackup and the config_file parameter
>> does *not* have an executable backup when used with the -R option, as
>> Heikki was suggesting was a requirement for this patch.
>
>
> That's not related to the -R option, t
On 28.03.2013 14:45, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 28 March 2013 11:36, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 6:23 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
No, it *would* take effect. The parameter is set in a config file that
is not part of the backup, so if you start the server from the backup
then it doesn't k
On 28 March 2013 11:36, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 6:23 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> No, it *would* take effect. The parameter is set in a config file that
>> is not part of the backup, so if you start the server from the backup
>> then it doesn't know that the recovery_config_dire
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 6:23 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> No, it *would* take effect. The parameter is set in a config file that
> is not part of the backup, so if you start the server from the backup
> then it doesn't know that the recovery_config_directory had been set
> and so it would read the rec
On 28 March 2013 08:31, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 27.03.2013 23:36, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>
>> Why do you think recovery_config_directory are different to
>> config_file with respect to pg_basebackup?
>
>
> pg_basebackup doesn't try to *write* anything to config_file. It does write
> to $PGDATA
On 27.03.2013 23:36, Simon Riggs wrote:
Why do you think recovery_config_directory are different to
config_file with respect to pg_basebackup?
pg_basebackup doesn't try to *write* anything to config_file. It does
write to $PGDATA/recovery.conf, with the expectation that it takes
effect when y
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 6:05 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> What exactly was wrong with pg_basebackup -R, without
> recovery_config_directory?
>
pg_basebackup -R generates automatically recovery.conf inside data folder,
so if
recovery_config_directory is specified the slave startup will fail.
Th
On 27 March 2013 21:05, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> Same argument applies to all conf files, not just recovery.conf.
>>
>> Sounds like the patch to add -R to pg_basebackup should be revoked as
>> being not well thought out. Or it should be fixed, in which case this
>> works the same.
>
> What ex
Simon Riggs wrote:
> doc/src/sgml/config.sgml | 17 +
So that doc builds could proceed without error I fixed the obvious
pasto in config.sgml.
--
Kevin Grittner
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mail
On 27.03.2013 20:02, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 27 March 2013 17:50, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Imagine that you have set recovery_config_directory='/foo/' in the master
server. Now you want to set up a standby, so you do:'
pg_basebackup -D data-standby -R
With the -R option, pg_basebackup creates
On 27 March 2013 18:15, Fujii Masao wrote:
> This patch breaks also pg_ctl promote because it always checks the existence
> of
> $PGDATA/recovery.conf.
You're right. It does. Good catch.
That also suggest a solution: create a status file called
$PGDATA/recovery_in_progress which would then all
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 2:58 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Arguments against?
>
Also the fact that many discussions have been done on recovery.conf between
the time this feature has been decided and actually committed (perhaps too
promptly just by looking at how this thread is becoming long)?
--
Mich
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 1:24 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
> On 27.03.2013 18:10, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>
>> On 27 March 2013 15:35, Heikki Linnakangas
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Ok, cool. Can you please revert this commit so that we can move on, then?
>>
>>
>> Please explain why you want this reverted, with
On 27 March 2013 17:50, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 27.03.2013 19:34, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>
>> On 27 March 2013 16:24, Heikki Linnakangas
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Lastly, it breaks the new pg_basebackup -R
>>>
>>> functionality; pg_basebackup will create the recovery.conf file, but it
>>> won't take e
On 27 March 2013 17:23, Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas writes:
>> On 27.03.2013 18:10, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>> On 27 March 2013 15:35, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Ok, cool. Can you please revert this commit so that we can move on, then?
>
>>> Please explain why you want this reverted, wi
On 27.03.2013 19:34, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 27 March 2013 16:24, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Lastly, it breaks the new pg_basebackup -R
functionality; pg_basebackup will create the recovery.conf file, but it
won't take effect.
AFAIK pg_basebackup doesn't backup files not in the data directory an
On 27 March 2013 16:24, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 27.03.2013 18:10, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>
>> On 27 March 2013 15:35, Heikki Linnakangas
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Ok, cool. Can you please revert this commit so that we can move on, then?
>>
>>
>> Please explain why you want this reverted, without menti
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> On 27.03.2013 18:10, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> On 27 March 2013 15:35, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>>> Ok, cool. Can you please revert this commit so that we can move on, then?
>> Please explain why you want this reverted, without mentioning the
>> other task we agree is r
On 27.03.2013 18:10, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 27 March 2013 15:35, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Ok, cool. Can you please revert this commit so that we can move on, then?
Please explain why you want this reverted, without mentioning the
other task we agree is required.
If an admin can't trust that
On 27 March 2013 15:35, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 27.03.2013 17:23, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>
>> On 27 March 2013 14:20, Heikki Linnakangas
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> You didn't answer the question. Does this get us any closer to merging
>>>
>>> postgresql.conf and recovery.conf? Why is this bundled in wi
On 27.03.2013 17:23, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 27 March 2013 14:20, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
You didn't answer the question. Does this get us any closer to merging
postgresql.conf and recovery.conf? Why is this bundled in with that?
Why do you think these points are bundled?
Because you say th
On 27 March 2013 14:20, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 27.03.2013 15:09, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>
>> On 27 March 2013 12:12, Heikki Linnakangas
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 27.03.2013 13:47, Simon Riggs wrote:
Allow external recovery_config_directory
If required, recovery.conf can now be
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:26 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> There are also weird edge cases here when the server is promoted. The
> recovery.conf file won't exist any more, but the GUC settings changes
> it contains will live on until the next SIGHUP.
>
Yes indeed, I forgot that.
The proposal Greg S
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> Here would be the plan:
> 1) we move all the recovery parameters to GUC as proposed Masao's patch (and
> somewhat my patch now).
> 2) as default, the custom file that is used to trigger recovery is called
> recovery.conf and needs to be lo
On 27.03.2013 15:09, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 27 March 2013 12:12, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 27.03.2013 13:47, Simon Riggs wrote:
Allow external recovery_config_directory
If required, recovery.conf can now be located outside of the data
directory.
Server needs read/write permissions on this d
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 10:43 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <
hlinnakan...@vmware.com> wrote:
> 3. Would it make sense to make the option "recovery_config_file", pointing
> to the file, instead of just the directory?
>
+1 on that. I just sent the same suggestion.
--
Michael
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 10:11 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 27 March 2013 12:59, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> > Also, based on Greg's spec (that Robert and I basically agreed on), if
> > recovery.conf is found at the root of data folder an error is returned to
> > user, recommending him to migrate c
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 27 March 2013 13:53, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> Please look again.
>>
>> I have a better idea: how about if you tell me where you see any such
>> message? Because I think the reason I don't see it is because it
>> doesn't exist.
>
> http://ww
On 27 March 2013 13:53, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Please look again.
>
> I have a better idea: how about if you tell me where you see any such
> message? Because I think the reason I don't see it is because it
> doesn't exist.
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20130109204225.gb21...@momjian.us
h
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 27 March 2013 13:21, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>> On 27 March 2013 12:59, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>>
Also, based on Greg's spec (that Robert and I basically agreed on), if
recover
On 27.03.2013 15:11, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 27 March 2013 12:59, Michael Paquier wrote:
Also, based on Greg's spec (that Robert and I basically agreed on), if
recovery.conf is found at the root of data folder an error is returned to
user, recommending him to migrate correctly by referring to de
On 27 March 2013 13:21, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> On 27 March 2013 12:59, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>
>>> Also, based on Greg's spec (that Robert and I basically agreed on), if
>>> recovery.conf is found at the root of data folder an error is retur
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 27 March 2013 12:59, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
>> Also, based on Greg's spec (that Robert and I basically agreed on), if
>> recovery.conf is found at the root of data folder an error is returned to
>> user, recommending him to migrate correc
On 27 March 2013 12:59, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Also, based on Greg's spec (that Robert and I basically agreed on), if
> recovery.conf is found at the root of data folder an error is returned to
> user, recommending him to migrate correctly by referring to dedicated
> documentation.
I'm followi
On 27 March 2013 12:12, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 27.03.2013 13:47, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>
>> Allow external recovery_config_directory
>> If required, recovery.conf can now be located outside of the data
>> directory.
>> Server needs read/write permissions on this directory.
>
>
> This was a s
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 9:59 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 9:12 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <
> hlinnakan...@vmware.com> wrote:
>
>> On 27.03.2013 13:47, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>
>>> Allow external recovery_config_directory
>>> If required, recovery.conf can now be located outsi
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 9:12 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 27.03.2013 13:47, Simon Riggs wrote:
>
>> Allow external recovery_config_directory
>> If required, recovery.conf can now be located outside of the data
>> directory.
>> Server needs read/write permissions on this directory.
>>
>
> Th
On 27.03.2013 13:47, Simon Riggs wrote:
Allow external recovery_config_directory
If required, recovery.conf can now be located outside of the data directory.
Server needs read/write permissions on this directory.
This was a surprising commit. Does this get us any closer to merging
postgresql.c
39 matches
Mail list logo
