On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 1:18 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Not sure if this is exactly the right way to do it, but I agree that > something along those lines is a good idea. I also think, maybe even > importantly, that we should probably document that people using > file-copy based hot backups should strongly consider removing the > replication slots by hand before using the backup. Good point. Something here would be adapted in this case: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/backup-file.html I am attaching an updated patch as well. -- Michael
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/backup.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/backup.sgml index 854b5fd..d8286b0 100644 --- a/doc/src/sgml/backup.sgml +++ b/doc/src/sgml/backup.sgml @@ -448,6 +448,13 @@ tar -cf backup.tar /usr/local/pgsql/data the contents of indexes for example, just the commands to recreate them.) However, taking a file system backup might be faster. </para> + + <para> + When doing a file system backup, it is recommended to drop replication + slots (see <xref linkend="streaming-replication-slots">) before using + it as it is not guaranteed that the WAL files needed by a slot will be + kept on the newly-created node. + </para> </sect1> <sect1 id="continuous-archiving"> diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/pg_basebackup.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/pg_basebackup.sgml index 6ce0c8c..b81ad8d 100644 --- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/pg_basebackup.sgml +++ b/doc/src/sgml/ref/pg_basebackup.sgml @@ -590,6 +590,13 @@ PostgreSQL documentation or an older major version, down to 9.1. However, WAL streaming mode (-X stream) only works with server version 9.3. </para> + + <para> + The backup will not include information about replication slots + (see <xref linkend="streaming-replication-slots">) as it is not + guaranteed that a node in recovery will have WAL files required for + a given slot. + </para> </refsect1> <refsect1>
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers