On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:19 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote:
> On 06/23/2015 07:51 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>
>> So... Attached are a set of patches dedicated at fixing this issue:
>
>
> Thanks for working on this!
>
>> - 0001, add if_not_exists to pg_tablespace_location, returning NULL if
>> path does not exist
>> - 0002, same with pg_stat_file, returning NULL if file does not exist
>> - 0003, same with pg_read_*file. I added them to all the existing
>> functions for consistency.
>> - 0004, pg_ls_dir extended with if_not_exists and include_dot_dirs
>> (thanks Robert for the naming!)
>> - 0005, as things get complex, a set of regression tests aimed to
>> covering those things. pg_tablespace_location is platform-dependent,
>> so there are no tests for it.
>> - 0006, the fix for pg_rewind, using what has been implemented before.
>
>
> With thes patches, pg_read_file() will return NULL for any failure to open
> the file, which makes pg_rewind to assume that the file doesn't exist in the
> source server, and will remove the file from the destination. That's
> dangerous, those functions should check specifically for ENOENT.
I'm wondering if using pg_read_file() to copy the file from source server
is reasonable. ISTM that it has two problems as follows.
1. It cannot read very large file like 1GB file. So if such large file was created in source server after failover,
pg_rewindwould not be able to copy the file. No?
2. Many users may not allow a remote client to connect to the PostgreSQL server as a superuser for some security
reasons.IOW, there would be no entry in pg_hba.conf for such connection. In this case, pg_rewind always fails
becausepg_read_file() needs superuser privilege. No?
I'm tempting to implement the replication command version of
pg_read_file(). That is, it reads and sends the data like BASE_BACKUP
replication command does...
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao