From: | "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
Subject: | Re: archive modules |
Date: | 2021-11-02 15:14:01 |
Message-ID: | 14CD3884-6D82-4928-83A2-265B1F539B29@amazon.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I've just realized I forgot to CC the active participants on the last
thread to this one, so I've attempted to do that now. I didn't
intentionally leave anyone out, but I'm sorry if I missed someone.
On 11/1/21, 10:24 PM, "Michael Paquier" <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> It seems to me that this patch is not moving into the right direction
> implementation-wise (I have read the arguments about
> backward-compatibility that led to the introduction of archive_library
> and its shell mode), for what looks like a duplicate of
> shared_preload_libraries but for an extra code path dedicated to the
> archiver, where we could just have a hook instead? We have been
> talking for some time now to make the archiver process more
> bgworker-ish, so as we finish with something closer to what the
> logical replication launcher is.
Hm. It sounds like you want something more like what was discussed
earlier in the other thread [0]. This approach would basically just
add a hook and call it a day. My patch for this approach [1] moved
the shell archive logic to a test module, but the general consensus
seems to be that we'd need to have it be present in core (and the
default).
Nathan
[0] https://postgr.es/m/8B7BF404-29D4-4662-A2DF-1AC4C98463EB%40amazon.com
[1] https://postgr.es/m/attachment/127385/v2-0001-Replace-archive_command-with-a-hook.patch
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2021-11-02 15:17:48 | Re: Non-superuser subscription owners |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2021-11-02 15:10:39 | Re: archive modules |