Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-3.hub.org [200.46.204.243])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3195F1336971
	for <pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@mail.postgresql.org>;
	Mon,  3 Jan 2011 14:56:59 -0400 (AST)
Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86])
	by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.243]) (amavisd-maia,
	port 10024) with ESMTP id 94763-03 for
	<pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@mail.postgresql.org>;
	Mon,  3 Jan 2011 18:56:51 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91E4F13364DE
	for <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>; Mon,  3 Jan 2011 14:56:51 -0400 (AST)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id p03IumMU022731;
	Mon, 3 Jan 2011 13:56:48 -0500 (EST)
To: Scott Ribe <scott_ribe@elevated-dev.com>
cc: Imre Oolberg <imre@auul.pri.ee>, pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Re: pg v. 8.4.5 misses objects and data after restoring from
	backup using wal
In-reply-to: <E486B5B1-EC5F-4615-8633-D89CF6665663@elevated-dev.com> 
References: <AANLkTikY_XJ0Ok7bLGVxXXfGgenfnzJ4RnSiM_H40FCM@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D2213EB.7090700@auul.pri.ee>
	<42066935-6D27-46E3-8094-836D204816B7@elevated-dev.com>
	<22500.1294080152@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<E486B5B1-EC5F-4615-8633-D89CF6665663@elevated-dev.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Scott Ribe <scott_ribe@elevated-dev.com>
	message dated "Mon, 03 Jan 2011 11:49:37 -0700"
Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2011 13:56:48 -0500
Message-ID: <22730.1294081008@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.91 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9,
	T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 201101/18
X-Sequence-Number: 36458

Scott Ribe <scott_ribe@elevated-dev.com> writes:
> Unless I misread his earlier post, he is starting the backup, copying files, stopping the backup, and expecting those transactions (between start & stop) to be applied, even though files changed during that time (including WAL files) have not all been copied. Again, unless I misread his earlier post, he is *not* copying WAL that was generated between start & stop.

If that's the case, it just plain won't work.  You can either shut down
the postmaster and copy a static set of files, or you can apply WAL to a
base backup that was taken from a live database.  There is no way to get
consistent results from a backup of a live database without applying all
the WAL that was generated while the backup was being taken.

			regards, tom lane