On 3/29/20 8:47 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 4:02 PM David Steele <david@pgmasters.net> wrote:
>> I prefer to validate the size and checksum in the same pass, but I'm not
>> sure it's that big a deal. If the backup is being corrupted under the
>> validate process that would also apply to files that had already been
>> validated.
>
> I did it like this because I thought that in typical scenarios it
> would be likely to produce useful results more quickly. For instance,
> suppose that you forget to restore the tablespace directories, and
> just get the main $PGDATA directory. Well, if you do it all in one
> pass, you might spend a long time checksumming things before you
> realize that some files are completely missing. I thought it would be
> useful to complain about files that are extra or missing or the wrong
> size FIRST, because that only requires us to stat() each file, and
> only after that do the comparatively extensive checksumming step that
> requires us to read the entire contents of each file. Granted, unless
> you use --exit-on-error, you're going to get all the complaints
> eventually anyway, but you might use that option, or you might hit ^C
> when you start to see a slough of complaints poppoing out.
Yeah, that seems reasonable.
In our case backups are nearly always compressed and/or encrypted so
even checking the original size is a bit of work. Getting the checksum
at the same time seems like an obvious win.
Currently we don't have a separate validate command outside of restore
but when we do we'll consider doing a pass to check for file presence
(and size when possible) first. Thanks!
> I wasn't worried about
> concurrent modification of the backup because then you're super-hosed
> no matter what.
Really, really, super-hosed.
Regards,
--
-David
david@pgmasters.net