Re: Named restore points

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Euler Taveira de Oliveira
Тема Re: Named restore points
Дата
Msg-id 4D667932.5010606@timbira.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Named restore points  (Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>)
Ответы Re: Named restore points  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Em 08-02-2011 17:35, Thom Brown escreveu:
> This could do with a bit more documentation about usage.  Below the
> Backup Control Functions table
> (http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/functions-admin.html#FUNCTIONS-ADMIN-BACKUP-TABLE),
> each function has a paragraph detailing what it does.
>
I forgot to check it.

> Also, I notice you can easily write over a label.  The case I'm
> thinking of is someone in psql creating a named restore point, then
> later on, they go in again, accidentally cursor up and select the
> previous statement and create it again.  Would this mean that the
> previous label is lost, or would it be the case that any subsequent
> duplicate labels would have no effect unless the WAL files with the
> original label in were consumed?  In either case, a note in the docs
> about this would be useful.
>
This is a limitation that I pointed out [1] but people decided to postpone
named restore point management. The first one is used as restore point. I
added it in the attached patch.

> And I don't see these label creations getting logged either.  Could we
> output that to the log because at least then users can grep the
> directory for labels, and, in most cases, the time they occurred?
>
Good point. I included location instead of time; time is already supplied by
log file.

The following patch implements the Thom's suggestions.


[1] http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4D48209C.7050109@timbira.com


--
   Euler Taveira de Oliveira
   http://www.timbira.com/

Вложения

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Review: Fix snapshot taking inconsistencies
Следующее
От: Marko Tiikkaja
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Review: Fix snapshot taking inconsistencies