On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > Hmm, so after running restore_command, check the file size and if it's > too short, treat it the same as if restore_command returned non-zero?
Yes, only in standby mode case. OTOH I think that normal archive recovery should treat it as a FATAL error. > And it will be retried on the next iteration. Works for me, though OTOH > it will then fail to complain about a genuinely WAL file that's > truncated for some reason. I guess there's no way around that, even if > you have a script as restore_command that does the file size check, it > will have the same problem. Right. But the server in standby mode also needs to complain about that? We might be able to read completely such a WAL file that looks truncated from the primary via SR, or from the archive after a few seconds. So it's odd for me to give up continuing the standby only by finding the WAL file whose file size is short. I believe that the warm standby (+ pg_standby) also is based on that thought. Regards, -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers