From: | Stephen Harris <lists(at)spuddy(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Shutting down a warm standby database in 8.2beta3 |
Date: | 2006-11-24 12:20:52 |
Message-ID: | 20061124122052.GA28516@pugwash.spuddy.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 02:47:27PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> It would back up to whereever the last recovery checkpoint was. I think
> we've got it hardwired at one recovery checkpoint per 100 source
> checkpoints ... maybe that's too far apart.
I'm talking out of my arse now, since I have no ideas of the internals
of postgres recovery, but maybe a recovery checkpoint can be added each
time it asks for a new archive file, or 100 source checkpoints, whatever
comes first.
A database that is mostly idle (eg overnight) but has 1 or 2 critical
transactions will have received lots of archive logs (from the 5 minute
checkpoint timeout) but not necessarily enough to cause recovery to
checkpoint. This could mean needing to keep a large number of shipped
logfiles available on the standby system "just in case".
--
rgds
Stephen
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Teodor Sigaev | 2006-11-24 12:27:17 | Re: tsearch to spellcheck |
Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2006-11-24 12:20:10 | Re: IN clause |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | John DeSoi | 2006-11-24 14:25:51 | Re: Windows psql changes after 8.1.1 |
Previous Message | alfranio correia junior | 2006-11-24 11:53:24 | Re: [Replica-hooks-discuss] Integrating Replication ino |