Thread: PATCH: Exclude temp relations from base backup
This is a follow-up patch from the exclude unlogged relations discussion [1]. The patch excludes temporary relations during a base backup using the existing looks_like_temp_rel_name() function for identification. It shares code to identify database directories from [1], so for now that has been duplicated in this patch to make it independent. I'll rebase depending on what gets committed first. Thanks, -- -David david@pgmasters.net [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/04791bab-cb04-ba43-e9c0-664a4c1ffb2c%40pgmasters.net
Attachment
Hi, On 2/28/18 10:55 AM, David Steele wrote: > This is a follow-up patch from the exclude unlogged relations discussion > [1]. > > The patch excludes temporary relations during a base backup using the > existing looks_like_temp_rel_name() function for identification. > > It shares code to identify database directories from [1], so for now > that has been duplicated in this patch to make it independent. I'll > rebase depending on what gets committed first. Updated the patch to change die() to BAIL_OUT() and use append_to_file() as suggested for another test patch [1]. Regards, -- -David david@pgmasters.net [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/6bc5d931-5b00-279f-f65a-26e32de400a6%40pgmasters.net
Attachment
On 3/13/18 12:34 PM, David Steele wrote: > Updated the patch to change die() to BAIL_OUT() and use append_to_file() > as suggested for another test patch. Updated patch now that the unlogged table exclusions have been committed [1]. Thanks, -- -David david@pgmasters.net [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4d9be1c0-5c58-d9a0-7152-2771224910ae%40sigaev.ru
Attachment
Hi!
Will autovacuum (or something else) complain about absense of relfile during
orphan table deleting? I mean, you get a base backup without temp tables, then
you try to run postgres on it and will it complain about existing record in
pg_class and absence of corresponding relfile?
David Steele wrote:
> On 3/13/18 12:34 PM, David Steele wrote:
>
>> Updated the patch to change die() to BAIL_OUT() and use append_to_file()
>> as suggested for another test patch.
>
> Updated patch now that the unlogged table exclusions have been committed
> [1].
>
> Thanks,
>
--
Teodor Sigaev E-mail: teodor@sigaev.ru
WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/
Greetings, * Teodor Sigaev (teodor@sigaev.ru) wrote: > Will autovacuum (or something else) complain about absense of relfile during > orphan table deleting? I mean, you get a base backup without temp tables, > then you try to run postgres on it and will it complain about existing > record in pg_class and absence of corresponding relfile? I would certainly hope not considering that's what happens during regular crash recovery also, so if there's an issue with that, we'd have a problem in released versions. There's an independent discussion that was being had recently about how to make sure those records in pg_class get cleaned up in a reasonable timeframe and don't lead to problems with wrap-arounds, but that's a different and pre-existing issue. Thanks! Stephen
Attachment
On 3/26/18 1:06 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > > * Teodor Sigaev (teodor@sigaev.ru) wrote: >> Will autovacuum (or something else) complain about absense of relfile during >> orphan table deleting? I mean, you get a base backup without temp tables, >> then you try to run postgres on it and will it complain about existing >> record in pg_class and absence of corresponding relfile? > > I would certainly hope not considering that's what happens during > regular crash recovery also, so if there's an issue with that, we'd have > a problem in released versions. Agreed. The logic for pg_basebackup was modeled off RemovePgTempFiles() which is called at postmaster start. We are just doing the cleanup in advance (in the backup only, of course). Thanks, -- -David david@pgmasters.net
Attachment
Thank you, pushed
David Steele wrote:
> On 3/26/18 1:06 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>>
>> * Teodor Sigaev (teodor@sigaev.ru) wrote:
>>> Will autovacuum (or something else) complain about absense of relfile during
>>> orphan table deleting? I mean, you get a base backup without temp tables,
>>> then you try to run postgres on it and will it complain about existing
>>> record in pg_class and absence of corresponding relfile?
>>
>> I would certainly hope not considering that's what happens during
>> regular crash recovery also, so if there's an issue with that, we'd have
>> a problem in released versions.
>
> Agreed. The logic for pg_basebackup was modeled off RemovePgTempFiles()
> which is called at postmaster start. We are just doing the cleanup in
> advance (in the backup only, of course).
>
> Thanks,
>
--
Teodor Sigaev E-mail: teodor@sigaev.ru
WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/