On 11/17/23 01:41, Laurenz Albe wrote:
On Thu, 2023-11-16 at 20:18 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
I've often had to analyze what caused corruption in PG instances, where the
symptoms match not having had backup_label in place when bringing on the
node. However that's surprisingly hard - the only log messages that indicate
use of backup_label are at DEBUG1.
Given how crucial use of backup_label is and how frequently people do get it
wrong, I think we should add a LOG message - it's not like use of backup_label
is a frequent thing in the life of a postgres instance and is going to swamp
the log. And I think we should backpatch that addition.
+1
I am not sure about the backpatch: it is not a bug, and we should not wantonly
introduce new log messages in a minor release. Some monitoring system may
get confused.
What about adding it to the "redo starts at" message, something like
redo starts at 12/12345678, taken from control file
or
redo starts at 12/12345678, taken from backup label
I think a backpatch is OK as long as it is a separate message, but I
like your idea of adding to the "redo starts" message going forward.
I know this isn't really a bug, but not being able to tell where
recovery information came from seems like a major omission in the logging.
Regards,
-David
