Re: production server down

From: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Hackers (PostgreSQL)" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: production server down
Date: 2004-12-15 17:24:57
Message-ID: 41C07369.6030405@joeconway.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
>> I don't trust it at all. So does that imply that I should override
>> next transaction id and WAL starting address per the manpage?
>
> Yes, override everything there's a switch for. Also check that the
> other values shown by pg_controldata look reasonable (the locale
> settings are probably the only ones you might get burned on).

OK

>>> What if anything have you got in $PGDATA/pg_xlog?
>>
>> -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16777216 Dec 13 15:39
>> 0000016500000077
>
> Um. That's so far from the values shown in pg_control that it's not
> funny.
>
> This is 7.4, right?

Correct.

> I have a crude xlog dump tool that I'll send you off-list. We should
> be able to identify the latest checkpoint in the existing XLOG files,
> and that will give you something to work with.

Thanks,

Joe

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Stark 2004-12-15 17:28:36 Re: production server down
Previous Message Jan Wieck 2004-12-15 17:22:14 Re: bgwriter changes