Re: [RFC] What should we do for reliable WAL archiving?

From: Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>
To: MauMau <maumau307(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] What should we do for reliable WAL archiving?
Date: 2014-03-16 18:59:40
Message-ID: 5325F49C.20109@proxel.se
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 03/16/2014 03:23 PM, MauMau wrote:
> From: "Amit Kapila" <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
>> How about using pg_receivexlog for archiving purpose?
>
> pg_receivexlog is good in that it does fsync(). But it seems difficult
> to use correctly, and I'm not sure if I can catch all WAL segments
> without any loss. pg_receivexlog must be started with postmaster and
> monitored with some measures. This won't be very easy at least on Windows.

Replication slots should solve the issue of making sure to catch all of
the WAL.

--
Andreas Karlsson

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Stark 2014-03-16 19:32:04 Re: First-draft release notes for next week's releases
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2014-03-16 18:36:41 Re: First-draft release notes for next week's releases