On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 10:30:52AM +1300, David Steele wrote: > On 11/12/23 08:21, David Steele wrote: >> As promised in [1], attached are some basic tests for the low-level >> backup method. > > Added to the 2024-03 CF.
There is already 040_standby_failover_slots_sync.pl in recovery/ that
uses the number of your test script. You may want to bump it, that's
a nit.
+unlink("$backup_dir/postmaster.pid")
+ or BAIL_OUT("unable to unlink $backup_dir/postmaster.pid");
+unlink("$backup_dir/postmaster.opts")
+ or BAIL_OUT("unable to unlink $backup_dir/postmaster.opts");
+unlink("$backup_dir/global/pg_control")
+ or BAIL_OUT("unable to unlink $backup_dir/global/pg_control");
RELCACHE_INIT_FILENAME as well?
+# Rather than writing out backup_label, try to recover the backup without
+# backup_label to demonstrate that recovery will not work correctly without it,
+# i.e. the canary table will be missing and the cluster will be corrupt.
Provide
+# only the WAL segment that recovery will think it needs.
Okay, why not. No objections to this addition. I am a bit surprised
that this is not scanning some of the logs produced by the startup
process for particular patterns.
+# Save backup_label into the backup directory and recover using the primary's
+# archive. This time recovery will succeed and the canary table will be
+# present.
Here are well, I think that we should add some log_contains() with
pre-defined patterns to show that recovery has completed the way we
want it with a backup_label up to the end-of-backup record.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
