CC Alexey for reasons that become clear below.
On 2019-Sep-25, Paul Guo wrote:
> > Question about 0003. If we specify --skip-clean-shutdown and the cluter
> > was not cleanly shut down, shouldn't we error out instead of trying to
> > press on?
>
> pg_rewind would error out in this case, see sanityChecks().
> Users are expected to clean up themselves if they use this argument.
Ah, good. We should have a comment about that below the relevant
stanza, I suggest. (Or maybe in the same comment that ends in line
272).
I pushed 0001 with a few tweaks. Nothing really substantial, just my
OCD that doesn't leave me alone ... but this means your subsequent
patches need to be adjusted. One thing is that that patch touched
pg_rewind for no reason (those changes should have been in 0002) --
dropped those.
Another thing in 0002 is that you're adding a "-R" switch to pg_rewind,
but we have another patch in the commitfest using the same switch for a
different purpose. Maybe you guys need to get to an agreement over who
uses the letter :-) Also, it would be super helpful if you review
Alexey's patch: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/24/1849/
This line is far too long:
+ printf(_(" -s, --skip-clean-shutdown skip running single-mode postgres if needed to make sure target is clean
shutdown\n"));
Can we make the description more concise?
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services