Prev: [HACKERS] Did we really want to force an initdb in beta2?
Next: [pgsql-hackers] Daily digest v1.10705 (13 messages)
From: Florian Pflug on 3 Jun 2010 14:06
On Jun 3, 2010, at 19:00 , Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas(a)enterprisedb.com> writes:
>> On 03/06/10 19:16, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> What exactly was the reason for this patch? Could it be held over till
>>> 9.1?
>
>> Before the patch, when you shut down a standby server, you get this
>> message in the log on the next startup:
>
>> LOG: database system was interrupted while in recovery at log time
>> 2010-06-02 14:48:28 EEST
>> HINT: If this has occurred more than once some data might be corrupted
>> and you might need to choose an earlier recovery target.
>
>> The problem is that that hint is pretty alarming.
>
> Maybe we should just get rid of the hint.


FYI, Robert Haas suggested the same in the thread that lead to this patch being applied. The arguments against doing that is that a real crash during recovery *is* something to be quite alarmed about.

best regards,
Florian Pflug


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

From: Tom Lane on 3 Jun 2010 18:21
Florian Pflug <fgp(a)phlo.org> writes:
> On Jun 3, 2010, at 19:00 , Tom Lane wrote:
>> Maybe we should just get rid of the hint.

> FYI, Robert Haas suggested the same in the thread that lead to this patch being applied. The arguments against doing that is that a real crash during recovery *is* something to be quite alarmed about.

After some discussion among core we're going to leave it as-is. Anybody
who doesn't want to initdb for beta2 can test out pg_upgrade ;-)

regards, tom lane

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

From: Tom Lane on 4 Jun 2010 09:49
Bruce Momjian <bruce(a)momjian.us> writes:
> Dave Page wrote:
>> Shouldn't we have bumped the catversion? The installers can't tell
>> that beta1 clusters won't work with beta2 :-(

> That is an interesting point. Tom bumped the pg_control version, but
> not the catalog version.

Right, because the catalog contents didn't change. Seems to me you'd
better teach the installers to look at PG_CONTROL_VERSION too.

regards, tom lane

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

From: Dave Page on 4 Jun 2010 07:00
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 11:21 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(a)sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Florian Pflug <fgp(a)phlo.org> writes:
>> On Jun 3, 2010, at 19:00 , Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Maybe we should just get rid of the hint.
>
>> FYI, Robert Haas suggested the same in the thread that lead to this patch being applied. The arguments against doing that is that a real crash during recovery *is* something to be quite alarmed about.
>
> After some discussion among core we're going to leave it as-is.  Anybody
> who doesn't want to initdb for beta2 can test out pg_upgrade ;-)

Shouldn't we have bumped the catversion? The installers can't tell
that beta1 clusters won't work with beta2 :-(


--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

From: Dave Page on 4 Jun 2010 11:06
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(a)sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(a)momjian.us> writes:
>> Dave Page wrote:
>>> Shouldn't we have bumped the catversion? The installers can't tell
>>> that beta1 clusters won't work with beta2 :-(
>
>> That is an interesting point.  Tom bumped the pg_control version, but
>> not the catalog version.
>
> Right, because the catalog contents didn't change.  Seems to me you'd
> better teach the installers to look at PG_CONTROL_VERSION too.

Hmm, is there anything else that might need to be checked?

--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: [HACKERS] Did we really want to force an initdb in beta2?
Next: [pgsql-hackers] Daily digest v1.10705 (13 messages)