From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Achilleas Mantzios <achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com>
cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Strange times in WAL files in archive directory (9.3)
In-reply-to: <588759C8.3090209@matrix.gatewaynet.com>
References: <58871A66.306@matrix.gatewaynet.com>
 <58873609.4030004@matrix.gatewaynet.com> <13126.1485264550@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <588759C8.3090209@matrix.gatewaynet.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Achilleas Mantzios <achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com>
	message dated "Tue, 24 Jan 2017 15:42:32 +0200"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <14803.1485267261.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 09:14:21 -0500
Message-ID: <14804.1485267261@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-admin-owner@postgresql.org

Achilleas Mantzios <achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com> writes:
> On 24/01/2017 15:29, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The larger issue here is that you're confusing the function of an archiv=
e area with that of the active WAL directory. The server will prune what is=
 in the active WAL directory and does not want your=20
>> help. In an archive directory, I'd expect the files to have monotonic ti=
mestamps corresponding to the times you copied them over to the archive, so=
 you could rely on the timestamp sequence there.=20

> I would be silly to mess around with pg_xlog. I was talking about the
> archive directory. *There* is where I noticed the inconsistencies.

If you copied the files to the archive directory when the server told you
they were ready, it should be impossible for them to have non-sequential
timestamps.  I'm wondering if you tried to short-circuit that, perhaps
by hard-linking them instead of copying.  That won't work at all, since
the server will reuse (overwrite) the files once it thinks you've
copied them.

			regards, tom lane


--=20
Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin