Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1rUYwZ-00Be5m-9j for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 21:13:27 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1rUYwY-00055R-Br for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 21:13:26 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1rUYwY-000554-0V for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 21:13:26 +0000 Received: from mail-io1-xd2f.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2f]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1rUYwV-0041zx-E8 for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 21:13:24 +0000 Received: by mail-io1-xd2f.google.com with SMTP id ca18e2360f4ac-7bf2c826a5aso137170639f.0 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 13:13:23 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1706562803; x=1707167603; darn=lists.postgresql.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=wiySOk1+eDPuLEY5bGQyhRLusskA8IHuoq7ELqCAxCo=; b=d7NTqnHo7xIhmQ5H8iTeBjWVTTciqE8pAonhrFWbh26CI59zC2y26TKC00n542kBRE 2NZoqOQ5CWL7iEt6hWxT34+eM8Ev2Vxm9yAhNdHAiUFhngSSpSVXK2iT9v+tNVTZqCHM RRqX4kp80bDNe/DplqjPwXhsHsonvoKX4fW8ts/jYQ9x4iOTEqk2+duiaZPxEzNdWCui FqM4jjkN/fThJer7OqfxVWScxG+iwyetIHi0ZC2JPSg9tDFvx+8RIxHdwUQr7h6zMRCt D+hV7kKTvjCvb3YE7C67kzGy+7w2c7QgTsTeI5PYRYs05unPqGv9HDozk0itYY1hxwcv rADQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1706562803; x=1707167603; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=wiySOk1+eDPuLEY5bGQyhRLusskA8IHuoq7ELqCAxCo=; b=eTBK9kLv+stn3oEDnYcxA05vk57PAQQLk6XtLOfK0A+ghZP9tzPXlmRmYGT3/dvDuQ UyxoFipB9VTrXAeLYXPv5/CkyinBQW2/f60VfShCQ4nKFkH40U/CgyjAJtfIamsL1Mdi j0lFq6Vuple5S78+P/jwX5/8ykHWcR51T9a9XF3kpkgetiWeFwJV0WbaIQcNRameYwa/ +v7P5AT6d+dV9VsZZT+B4VMVPFq/9J8C9cv0iDKUexv6R7I/jZ79ImWDavoptO+JzYDk Ig4k8qOnAIpYZS7Gy7Lu3ywEyI3vpRXa6ESp7Gxam4pSqPnhbperJZwwHr7IU19LyZ6/ KMdA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxhIjtL2y1iEkJx66GMVmmu/IQ0ZToirMaIBRDPL+2kArdRmSJv ie7dtOSF9wZJlm+iBPpYxYRuyURwyI4G68/SWB9Mrn1JpWxo28Hv X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGpfJFK2hyIc8NRUbQSxHHB1t8ivP6Zp46w50oFyWUKKYvNENkVlb1Sd5a6g9mBO/jtYcjkaQ== X-Received: by 2002:a92:d20e:0:b0:363:7a41:ab49 with SMTP id y14-20020a92d20e000000b003637a41ab49mr5065381ily.4.1706562802750; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 13:13:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from nathanxps13 (162-195-168-172.lightspeed.stlsmo.sbcglobal.net. [162.195.168.172]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id bn28-20020a056e02339c00b0036194d1dad6sm2316888ilb.40.2024.01.29.13.13.22 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 29 Jan 2024 13:13:22 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 15:13:21 -0600 From: Nathan Bossart To: Robert Haas Cc: Alexander Lakhin , Matthias van de Meent , PostgreSQL Hackers Subject: Re: cleanup patches for incremental backup Message-ID: <20240129211321.GA3676549@nathanxps13> References: <20240124170846.GA2643050@nathanxps13> <8aed364e-f572-4561-b4fc-ff149067b670@gmail.com> <20240127163109.GA3047116@nathanxps13> <20240129182130.GA3670200@nathanxps13> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 03:18:50PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > I'm wondering if what we need to do is run pg_walsummary on both > summary files in that case. If we just pick one or the other, how do > we know which one to pick? Even if we do that, isn't it possible that none of the summaries will include the change? Presently, we get the latest summarized LSN, make a change, and then wait for the next summary file with a greater LSN than what we saw before the change. But AFAICT there's no guarantee that means the change has been summarized yet, although the chances of that happening in a test are probably pretty small. Could we get the LSN before and after making the change and then inspect all summaries that include that LSN range? -- Nathan Bossart Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com