Small fixes about backup history file in doc and pg_standby
Hackorum builds and tests every patch posted to the lists, not only commitfest submissions. This is Hackorum's own CI rather than the PostgreSQL project's, and it is still under testing - please report anything that looks wrong.
You can run a PostgreSQL built from this patch straight from Docker, with no checkout and no build:
docker run --rm -p 5432:5432 ghcr.io/hackorum-dev/postgres-patch:t38938psql -h localhost -U postgresBuilt from patchset v5 (message #5), August 18, 2026 at 04:50 PM.
Every patchset is also pushed to a branch of our PostgreSQL fork, so you can check out the same tree CI built. Without a PostgreSQL checkout:
git clone --branch t38938_5 https://github.com/hackorum-dev/postgres.gitIn a checkout you already have, add the fork once:
git remote add hackorum https://github.com/hackorum-dev/postgres.gitthen, for this patchset and every later one:
git fetch hackorum t38938_5 && git checkout t38938_5Patchset v5 (message #5) is on t38938_5
Hi,
While looking into the backup and recovery code, I found small documentation bugs.
The documatation says that the backup history files can be requested for recovery,
but it's not used by the system and not requested anymore since PG 9.0
(commit 06f82b29616cd9effcaefd99c6b6e2e80697482f) and never be requested.
Attached patch (doc_backup_history_file.patch) corrects the description about this.
In addition, the current pg_standby still can handle a backup history file that are
never requested. It is harmless but unnecessary code. Another attached patch
(pg_standby.patch) removes this part of code.
Regards,
--
Yugo Nagata <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>
Hello.
Good catch!
At Tue, 26 Jun 2018 17:47:52 +0900, Yugo Nagata <nagata@sraoss.co.jp> wrote in <20180626174752.0ce505e3.nagata@sraoss.co.jp>
Hi,
While looking into the backup and recovery code, I found small documentation bugs.
The documatation says that the backup history files can be requested for recovery,
but it's not used by the system and not requested anymore since PG 9.0
(commit 06f82b29616cd9effcaefd99c6b6e2e80697482f) and never be requested.Attached patch (doc_backup_history_file.patch) corrects the description about this.
In addition, the current pg_standby still can handle a backup history file that are
never requested. It is harmless but unnecessary code. Another attached patch
(pg_standby.patch) removes this part of code.
The comment fix seems fine and they seem to be all occurances of
the word ".backup" in the context of recovery_command.
The definition of the symbol XLOG_BACKUP_LABEL is no longer
useful after your patch applied. Removing the symbol makes
XLOG_DATA and the variable nextWALFileName useless and finally we
can remove all branching using it.
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 5:47 PM, Yugo Nagata <nagata@sraoss.co.jp> wrote:
Hi,
While looking into the backup and recovery code, I found small documentation bugs.
The documatation says that the backup history files can be requested for recovery,
but it's not used by the system and not requested anymore since PG 9.0
(commit 06f82b29616cd9effcaefd99c6b6e2e80697482f) and never be requested.Attached patch (doc_backup_history_file.patch) corrects the description about this.
Pushed. Thanks!
In addition, the current pg_standby still can handle a backup history file that are
never requested. It is harmless but unnecessary code. Another attached patch
(pg_standby.patch) removes this part of code.
Since this is not bug fix, let's discuss this in 12dev cycle.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
On Wed, 27 Jun 2018 00:58:18 +0900
Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 5:47 PM, Yugo Nagata <nagata@sraoss.co.jp> wrote:
Hi,
While looking into the backup and recovery code, I found small documentation bugs.
The documatation says that the backup history files can be requested for recovery,
but it's not used by the system and not requested anymore since PG 9.0
(commit 06f82b29616cd9effcaefd99c6b6e2e80697482f) and never be requested.Attached patch (doc_backup_history_file.patch) corrects the description about this.
Pushed. Thanks!
Thanks!
In addition, the current pg_standby still can handle a backup history file that are
never requested. It is harmless but unnecessary code. Another attached patch
(pg_standby.patch) removes this part of code.Since this is not bug fix, let's discuss this in 12dev cycle.
Certainly.
Regards,
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
--
Yugo Nagata <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>
On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 20:19:42 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time)
Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
Hello.
Good catch!
At Tue, 26 Jun 2018 17:47:52 +0900, Yugo Nagata <nagata@sraoss.co.jp> wrote in <20180626174752.0ce505e3.nagata@sraoss.co.jp>
Hi,
While looking into the backup and recovery code, I found small documentation bugs.
The documatation says that the backup history files can be requested for recovery,
but it's not used by the system and not requested anymore since PG 9.0
(commit 06f82b29616cd9effcaefd99c6b6e2e80697482f) and never be requested.Attached patch (doc_backup_history_file.patch) corrects the description about this.
In addition, the current pg_standby still can handle a backup history file that are
never requested. It is harmless but unnecessary code. Another attached patch
(pg_standby.patch) removes this part of code.The comment fix seems fine and they seem to be all occurances of
the word ".backup" in the context of recovery_command.The definition of the symbol XLOG_BACKUP_LABEL is no longer
useful after your patch applied. Removing the symbol makes
XLOG_DATA and the variable nextWALFileName useless and finally we
can remove all branching using it.
Thank you for your reviewing my patch.
I've also removed XLOG_BACKUP_LABEL, but I left nextWALFileName
since this is still referred in CustomizableCleanupPriorWALFiles().
Attached is the updated patch.
Regards,
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
--
Yugo Nagata <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 05:42:07PM +0900, Yugo Nagata wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jun 2018 00:58:18 +0900
Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:In addition, the current pg_standby still can handle a backup history file that are
never requested. It is harmless but unnecessary code. Another attached patch
(pg_standby.patch) removes this part of code.Since this is not bug fix, let's discuss this in 12dev cycle.
+1.
--
MichaelOn Wed, 27 Jun 2018 18:36:46 +0900
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 05:42:07PM +0900, Yugo Nagata wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jun 2018 00:58:18 +0900
Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:In addition, the current pg_standby still can handle a backup history file that are
never requested. It is harmless but unnecessary code. Another attached patch
(pg_standby.patch) removes this part of code.Since this is not bug fix, let's discuss this in 12dev cycle.
+1.
I added this to CF.
--
Michael
--
Yugo Nagata <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>
On 27.06.18 18:22, Yugo Nagata wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jun 2018 18:36:46 +0900
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 05:42:07PM +0900, Yugo Nagata wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jun 2018 00:58:18 +0900
Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:In addition, the current pg_standby still can handle a backup history file that are
never requested. It is harmless but unnecessary code. Another attached patch
(pg_standby.patch) removes this part of code.Since this is not bug fix, let's discuss this in 12dev cycle.
+1.
I added this to CF.
committed
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services