From: | Sawada Masahiko <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Set new system identifier using pg_resetxlog |
Date: | 2014-06-25 17:43:07 |
Message-ID: | CAD21AoCdcHvu8X3i5yY40ZEJOjsW=5X-hKKQA5GzF9+Hi-u+1Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
I send you review comment about thie patch.
I found no error/warning with compling and installation.
I have executed pg_resetxlog with some input pattern.
$ initdb -D data -E UTF8 --no-locale
$ pg_controldata data | grep "Database system identifier"
Database system identifier: 6028907917695471865
--
$ pg_resetxlog -s -n data | grep "Database system identifier"
Database system identifier: 6028907917695471865
The -s option does not works fine with -n option.
--
$ pg_resetxlog
-s6028907917695471865111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
data
Transaction log reset
$ pg_controldata data | grep "Database system identifier"
Database system identifier: 18446744073709551615
pg_resetxlog is finished successfully, but system identifier was not
changed.
Also I think that checking data about number of digits is needed.
regards
--
Sawada Masahiko
On Thursday, June 19, 2014, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 18/06/14 19:26, Robert Haas wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't see how the proposed ability makes it more dangerous. It
>>> *already* has the ability to reset the timelineid. That's the case where
>>> users are much more likely to think about resetting it because that's
>>> much more plausible than taking a unrelated cluster and resetting its
>>> sysid, timeline and LSN.
>>>
>>
>> All right, well, I've said my piece. I don't have anything to add to
>> that that isn't sheer repetition. My vote is to hold off on this
>> until we've talked about replication identifiers and other related
>> topics in more depth. But if that position doesn't garner majority
>> support ... so be it!
>>
>>
> I am not sure I get what does this have to do with replication
> identifiers. The patch has several use-cases, one of them has to do that
> you can know the future system id before you set it, which is useful for
> automating some things...
>
> --
> Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
> PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>
--
Regards,
-------
Sawada Masahiko
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2014-06-25 17:45:31 | Re: better atomics - v0.5 |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2014-06-25 17:39:53 | Re: better atomics - v0.5 |