Re: after using pg_resetxlog, db lost

From: zhicheng wang <wang_zc(at)yahoo(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: after using pg_resetxlog, db lost
Date: 2004-06-04 13:35:39
Message-ID: 20040604133539.14419.qmail@web51006.mail.yahoo.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

sorry for the late reply

in case it is useful to any one. the db server uses
san to store the data. the update is only to the bios
of the fibre card. if this is wrong, many other files
should also go wrong, which is not the case.

cheng

--- Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote: >
=?iso-8859-1?q?zhicheng=20wang?=
> <wang_zc(at)yahoo(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> > Jun 1 10:43:55 linux708 postgres[5537]: [30] LOG:
> database system shutdown was interrupted at
> 2004-05-28 16:32:08 BST
> > Jun 1 10:43:55 linux708 postgres[5537]: [31] LOG:
> open of
> /var/lib/pgsql/data/pg_xlog/0000000000000000 (log
> file 0, segment 0) failed: No such file or directory
> > Jun 1 10:43:55 linux708 postgres[5537]: [32] LOG:
> invalid primary checkpoint record
> > Jun 1 10:43:55 linux708 postgres[5537]: [33] LOG:
> open of
> /var/lib/pgsql/data/pg_xlog/0000000000000000 (log
> file 0, segment 0) failed: No such file or directory
> > Jun 1 10:43:55 linux708 postgres[5537]: [34] LOG:
> invalid secondary checkpoint record
> > Jun 1 10:43:55 linux708 postgres[5537]: [35]
> PANIC: unable to locate a valid checkpoint record
>
> Hm, was this a very new Postgres installation? The
> links to log file
> 0/0 suggest that it was so new as to not yet have
> accumulated 16Mb worth
> of WAL traffic ... which is not a lot of traffic.
>
> If the links are accurate then what must have
> happened is that your disk
> subsystem lost the physical xlog file.
>
> If the links are not accurate then this suggests
> corruption of the
> pg_control file (i.e., overwriting those fields with
> zeroes). I find
> this idea a bit improbable, though, because the
> pg_control file has
> a CRC64 checksum. It seems very unlikely that
> corruption of the
> pg_control file wouldn't have been noticed and
> complained of.
>
> In any case, it seems that your upgrade to new disk
> hardware did not go
> as smoothly as you thought. I'd be pretty surprised
> if the Postgres
> files are the only ones that got corrupted --- you'd
> better look around
> and find out what else is broken :-(
>
> regards, tom lane

=====
Best wishes
Z C Wang




____________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping"
your friends today! Download Messenger Now
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-06-04 13:50:05 Re: after using pg_resetxlog, db lost
Previous Message zhicheng wang 2004-06-04 13:33:08 pg_class could not be found