Hi all,
On 02/12/2014 08:27 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 6:55 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Greg Stark <st...@mit.edu> writes:
For what it's worth I've confirmed the bug in wal-e caused the initial
problem.
Huh? Bug in wal-e? What bug?
WAL-E actually didn't restore a whole 1GB file due to a transient S3
problem, in fact a bunch of them. It's remarkable that Postgres kept
going with that much data missing. But the arithmetic worked out on
the case I checked it on, which was the last one that I just sent the
xlog record for last night. In that case there was precisely one
segment missing and the relation was extended by the number of
segments you would expect if it filled in that missing segment and
then jumped to the end of the relation.
sorry for interrupting, but did we already notify wal-e's maintainer?
Andrea
ps cc:ed Daniel
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
