Renaming the file sounds like an excellent design decision since the current
name is a proven "human factor" bug.
I am sorry, but as soon as you look at the files it is obvious that they
are not "just" log files. If someone
is going to delete the xlog they are going to do it no matter what w
On Monday 2005-11-14 20:48, Tim Allen wrote:
OOPS deleted pg_xlog because surely it was only a log file.
>
> We've seen reports of people firing this particular foot-gun before,
> haven't we? Would it make sense to rename pg_xlog to something that
> doesn't sound like it's "just" full of log fil
I agree.
(sorry again Tom... dang GMAIL should default reply to all g!)
On 11/14/05, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:> On Mon, 2005-11-14 at 23:02 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> There's something in what you say. We'd have to rename pg_clog as well,>>
Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 2005-11-14 at 23:02 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> There's something in what you say. We'd have to rename pg_clog as well,
>> since that's even more critical than pg_xlog ...
> Rename them to pg_donttouchthis and pg_youneedthis.
:-)
On a more serious
On Mon, 2005-11-14 at 23:02 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Tim Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > We've seen reports of people firing this particular foot-gun before,
> > haven't we? Would it make sense to rename pg_xlog to something that
> > doesn't sound like it's "just" full of log files? Eg pg_w
Christopher Kings-Lynne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Would it be wise or insane for us to to mention in the startup error a
> HINT that if you've removed such files, only hope is full restore from
> backup or pg_resetxlog with data loss?
Not sure that we should have a HINT recommending a worst-
We've seen reports of people firing this particular foot-gun before,
haven't we? Would it make sense to rename pg_xlog to something that
doesn't sound like it's "just" full of log files? Eg pg_wal - something
where the half-educated will have no idea what it is, and therefore not
think they kno
Tim Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> We've seen reports of people firing this particular foot-gun before,
> haven't we? Would it make sense to rename pg_xlog to something that
> doesn't sound like it's "just" full of log files? Eg pg_wal - something
> where the half-educated will have no idea
ITS ONT Alcazar, Jose Aguedo C wrote:
Anyone!
Before anything else, I have no background in PostgreSQL. But I have a
little knowledge in Linux. We used postgreSQL to run one of our website. It
runs in Redhat Linux 7.3. Our System Administrator, who used to maintain
this server, had resigned and
