From: | Shaun Thomas <sthomas(at)optionshouse(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Steve Kehlet <steve(dot)kehlet(at)gmail(dot)com>, Forums postgresql <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: hot_standby_feedback vs. max_standby_archive_delay/max_standby_streaming_delay? |
Date: | 2014-08-21 20:53:50 |
Message-ID: | 53F65C5E.7020400@optionshouse.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 08/21/2014 03:44 PM, Steve Kehlet wrote:
> So we're going to try applying max_standby_archive_delay and
> max_standby_streaming_delay to 1h or so. We're also looking at
> pg_xlog_replay_pause(), although this is less desirable because we
> don't want to have to ask the people running reports to remember to
> pause and resume things.
Looks right to me. Though with these settings, keep in mind that these
are not on a per-query basis. You will have queries canceled that may
have only been running for a few seconds, if other queries have caused a
long cumulative delay.
You can fiddle with these until you stop getting cancellations though.
Especially if, as you say, it's a slave that can fall behind safely.
--
Shaun Thomas
OptionsHouse, LLC | 141 W. Jackson Blvd. | Suite 800 | Chicago IL, 60604
312-676-8870
sthomas(at)optionshouse(dot)com
______________________________________________
See http://www.peak6.com/email_disclaimer/ for terms and conditions related to this email
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | John R Pierce | 2014-08-21 20:55:41 | Re: hot_standby_feedback vs. max_standby_archive_delay/max_standby_streaming_delay? |
Previous Message | Steve Kehlet | 2014-08-21 20:44:15 | hot_standby_feedback vs. max_standby_archive_delay/max_standby_streaming_delay? |