Re: pg_basebackup: could not get transaction log end position from server: FATAL: could not open file "./pg_hba.conf~": Permission denied

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От David G Johnston
Тема Re: pg_basebackup: could not get transaction log end position from server: FATAL: could not open file "./pg_hba.conf~": Permission denied
Дата
Msg-id 1400260318401-5804257.post@n5.nabble.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: pg_basebackup: could not get transaction log end position from server: FATAL: could not open file "./pg_hba.conf~": Permission denied  (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>)
Ответы Re: Re: pg_basebackup: could not get transaction log end position from server: FATAL: could not open file "./pg_hba.conf~": Permission denied
Список pgsql-hackers
Andres Freund-3 wrote
> On 2014-05-16 18:29:25 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 6:25 PM, Andres Freund <

> andres@

> >wrote:
>> 
>> > On 2014-05-16 18:20:35 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> > > On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Joshua D. Drake <

> jd@

> > > >wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > At a minimum:
>> > > >
>> > > > Check to see if there is going to be a permission error BEFORE the
>> base
>> > > > backup begins:
>> > > >
>> > > > starting basebackup:
>> > > >   checking perms: ERROR no access to pg_hba.conf~ base backup will
>> fail
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > That's pretty much what it does if you enable progress meter. I
>> realize
>> > you
>> > > don't necessarily want that one, but we could have a switch that
>> still
>> > > tells the server to measure the size, but not actually print the
>> output?
>> > > While it costs a bit of overhead to do that, that's certainly
>> something
>> > > that's a lot more safe than ignoring errors.
>> >
>> > Don't think it'll show you that error - that mode only stats() files,
>> > right? So you'd need to add access() or open()s.
>> >
>> >
>> You're right, we don't. I thought we did, but was clearly remembering
>> wrong.
>> 
>> I guess we could add an access() call to that codepath though. Not sure
>> if
>> that's going to cause any real overhead compared to the rest of what
>> we're
>> doing anyway?
> 
> It's not free. But I don't think it'd seriously matter in comparison.
> 
> But it doesn't protect you if the file is created during the backup -
> which as you know can take a long time. For example because somebody
> felt the need to increase wal_keep_segments.
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> Andres Freund

Can we simply backup the non-data parts of $PGDATA first then move onto the
data-parts?  For the files that we'd be dealing with it would be
sufficiently quick to just try and fail, immediately, then check for all
possible preconditions first.  The main issue seems to be the case where the
2TB of data get backed-up and then a small 1k file blows away all that work. 
Lets do those 1k files first.

David J.




--
View this message in context:
http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/pg-basebackup-could-not-get-transaction-log-end-position-from-server-FATAL-could-not-open-file-pg-hbd-tp5804225p5804257.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - hackers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Andrew Dunstan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: chr() is still too loose about UTF8 code points
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: chr() is still too loose about UTF8 code points