Failing Barman backup after upgrading Postgres 10 to 13

[Paweł Kiersznowski]

2021-09-24 13:35:37.616 GMT [19735]     614dd1dc.4d17 DETAIL:  The failed archive command was: rsync -a pg_wal/000000010000004800000028 barman@<ip>:/var/lib/barman/ssh-pg/incoming/000000010000004800000028
2021-09-24 13:35:40.129 GMT [16431] db barman xx <ip> 614dcf4d.402f WARNING:  still waiting for all required WAL segments to be archived (960 seconds elapsed)
2021-09-24 13:35:40.129 GMT [16431] db barman xx <ip> 614dcf4d.402f HINT:  Check that your archive_command is executing properly.  You can safely cancel this backup, but the database backup will not be usable without all the WAL segments.

Barman 2.3 was running fine before I upgraded the DB to version 13. I upgraded Barman to 2.14, installed postgresql-client-13 on the host and I still receive the error above.

What I noticed is that the WAL 000000010000004800000028 doesn't even exist in the postgres pg_wal dir. is there any reason why Barman is looking for a non-existing WAL?

any suggestions how to make the backups work again?

Thank you!

[Michael Wallace]

Hi Pawel,

Do you see any reference to 000000010000004800000028 in the pg_wal/archive_status directory?

I'm not aware of any obvious reasons why this would be happening - can you run `barman diagnose` and post the output here?

It's also worth running the command specified in archive_command manually as the postgres user, just to verify it still works when the target file can be found.

Best regards,

Mike

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "Barman for PostgreSQL" group.
To post to this group, send email to pgba...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
pgbarman+u...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/pgbarman?hl=en?hl=en-GB

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Barman, Backup and Recovery Manager for PostgreSQL" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to pgbarman+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pgbarman/295efe41-9dc1-4457-92eb-8dbcb49e5430n%40googlegroups.com.

[Abhijit Menon-Sen]

On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 7:49 PM Paweł Kiersznowski
<pa...@kiersznowski.com> wrote:
>
> What I noticed is that the WAL 000000010000004800000028 doesn't even exist in the postgres pg_wal dir. is there any reason why Barman is looking for a non-existing WAL?

You're looking at the problem backwards: Barman does not "look for"
WAL. Postgres is the one who runs archive_command, so if
archive_command is failing, you must investigate the cause on the
Postgres server. If the command is failing because WAL is missing, you
should look at more of the log file and try to figure out what
happened to it.

-- Abhijit

[Luca Ferrari]

On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 6:36 PM Abhijit Menon-Sen
<abhijit....@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 7:49 PM Paweł Kiersznowski
> <pa...@kiersznowski.com> wrote:
> >
> > What I noticed is that the WAL 000000010000004800000028 doesn't even exist in the postgres pg_wal dir. is there any reason why Barman is looking for a non-existing WAL?
>
> You're looking at the problem backwards: Barman does not "look for"
> WAL. Postgres is the one who runs archive_command, so if

Yes indeed, and for the very same reason I don't think PostgreSQL is
trying to acrhive a missing wal, so either the wal has been removed by
something else or it is still there.

Luca