From: | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pg_basebackup may fail to send feedbacks. |
Date: | 2015-02-10 12:34:03 |
Message-ID: | 20150210.213403.261969054.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
15 19:48:23 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote in <20150210(dot)194823(dot)219136034(dot)horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
> Considering pg_basebackup/receivexlog, the loop in receivelog.c
> does not maintain the time value within it, so I think we are
> forced to use feGetCurrentTimeStamp if not using SIGALRM. The wal
> reading function simply gets the data from the buffer in memory
> for most calls so the gettimeofday for each iteration could slow
> the process significantly. SIGALRM seems to be valuable for the
> case.
As a very fancy and ugly sample, the attached patch does this,
although, I'm a bit at a loss how to make this signal things to
be more sober..
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
0001-receivelog.c-sigalrm.patch | text/x-patch | 2.5 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2015-02-10 12:46:08 | Re: Assertion failure when streaming logical changes |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2015-02-10 12:30:51 | Re: What exactly is our CRC algorithm? |