Re: Archive recovery won't be completed on some situation. - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Heikki Linnakangas
Subject Re: Archive recovery won't be completed on some situation.
Date
Msg-id 532977FE.70204@vmware.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Archive recovery won't be completed on some situation.  (Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Responses Re: Archive recovery won't be completed on some situation.
Re: Archive recovery won't be completed on some situation.
List pgsql-hackers
On 03/19/2014 10:28 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> The*problematic*  operation sequence I saw was performed by
> pgsql-RA/Pacemaker. It stops a server already with immediate mode
> and starts the Master as a Standby at first, then
> promote. Focusing on this situation, there would be reasonable to
> reset backup positions.

Well, that's scary. I would suggest doing a fast shutdown instead. But 
if you really want to do an immediate shutdown, you should delete the 
backup_label file after the shutdown

When restarting after immediate shutdown and a backup_label file is 
present, the system doesn't know if the system crashed during a backup, 
and it needs to perform crash recovery, or if you're trying restore from 
a backup. It makes a compromise, and starts recovery from the checkpoint 
given in the backup_label, as if it was restoring from a backup, but if 
it doesn't see a backup-end WAL record, it just starts up anyway (which 
would be wrong if you are indeed restoring from a backup). But if you 
create a recovery.conf file, that indicates that you are definitely 
restoring from a backup, so it's more strict and insists that the 
backup-end record must be replayed.

> 9.4 canceles backup mode even on
> immediate shutdown so the operation causes no problem, but 9.3
> and before are doesn't.

Hmm, I don't think we've changed that behavior in 9.4.

- Heikki



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: Archive recovery won't be completed on some situation.
Next
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: B-tree descend for insertion locking