On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 9:34 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote:
On 05/08/2015 03:25 PM, Vladimir Borodin wrote:
Seems, that pg_rewind does not account --dry-run option properly. A simple fix for that is attached.
No, the --dry-run takes effect later. It performs all the actions it normally would, including reading files from the source, except for actually writing anything in the target. See the dry-run checks in file_ops.c
Urgh, my test script had an error and I made grep only in pg_rewind.c. Sorry for noise.
Even if the patch sent is incorrect, shouldn't there be some process bypass in updateControlFile() and createBackupLabel() in case of a --dry-run?
They both use open_target_file() and write_target_file(), which check for --dry-run and do nothing if it's set.
Hmm, I wonder it we should print something else than "Done!" at the end, if run in --dry-run mode. Or give some indication around the time it says "Rewinding from last common checkpoint at ...", that it's running in dry-run mode and won't actually modify anything. The progress messages are a bit alarming if you don't realize that it's skipping all the writes.
That would be really nice.
Added comments in all places mentioned in this thread.
Wouldn't hurt to also augment that rather doom-looking "point of no return" comment with a note that says writes won't happen if in dry-run. :)
