Message-ID: <13177aa3d39d37acc4cb2f258643dee56f4dfb50.camel@cybertec.at>
Subject: Re: Clarifying pg_rewind failure risks due to asynchronous file
 deletions
From: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
To: juliana.crespo@enterprisedb.com, pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2026 20:56:00 +0100
In-Reply-To: 
 <177325108551.1938400.15560714772530033016@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
References: 
	<177325108551.1938400.15560714772530033016@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.58.3 (3.58.3-1.fc43) 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/13177aa3d39d37acc4cb2f258643dee56f4dfb50.camel%40cybertec.at>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 2026-03-11 at 17:44 +0000, PG Doc comments form wrote:
> Reference Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/app-pgrewind.html
>=20
> Proposed Enhancement: Include an explicit warning in the **"Description"*=
*
> or **"Warnings"** section regarding the requirement for the target data
> directory to remain static during the rewind process.
>=20
> Reasoning: While the documentation states that `pg_rewind` "will fail
> immediately if it finds files it cannot write directly to," it does not
> currently warn against asynchronous file deletions within the target
> `$PGDATA` (or tablespace/WAL directories) while the utility is running.
>=20
> In high-concurrency or automated environments, background processes=E2=80=
=94such as
> the **WAL summarizer** cleanup, automated log rotations, or external
> archiver tools (e.g., `pgbackrest` spooling)=E2=80=94may remove files tha=
t
> `pg_rewind` has already indexed for synchronization. This results in a fa=
tal
> "No such file or directory" error during the final stages of the rewind,
> often leaving the target directory in an unrecoverable state.
>=20
> Suggested Phrasing:
>=20
> "Warning: The target data directory must remain static during the rewind
> operation. Any asynchronous file modifications or deletions=E2=80=94such =
as those
> performed by automated log rotation, WAL summary cleanups, or external
> backup tools=E2=80=94may cause `pg_rewind` to fail. If a file is removed =
after the
> synchronization process has begun, the utility may error out, leaving the
> target cluster in an inconsistent state that requires a new base backup."

I'd say that it is obvious that nobody should mess with the target
data directory while pg_rewind is working on it.  Nothing except
PostgreSQL itself should ever mess with the data directory, period.
The WAL summarizer is part of PostgreSQL.  You are not trying to tell
us that you started the PostgreSQL server on the data directory while
you ran pg_rewind, are you?

It is also not documented that you shouldn't power down the machine
while you are running pg_rewind.  Or remove the disk.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe