From: | Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Charlton Galvarino <charlton(at)2creek(dot)com>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: psql 8 warm standby strong start, weak finish |
Date: | 2015-04-30 23:15:51 |
Message-ID: | 5542B7A7.7030106@aklaver.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 04/30/2015 01:49 PM, Charlton Galvarino wrote:
>>>> archiving run. Postgres will recycle WALs on its own when they are no
>>>> longer needed. Or is there is some compelling reason you want to get rid
>> of WALs?
>>>
>>> Ah. I didn't know that. I thought the cleanup was on me. Bonus!
>>
>> For more info take a look here:
>>
>> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/static/wal-configuration.html
>
> Things are running smoothly so far. The proof will be in the pudding after 48h or so. But I have changed my rsync from its original pull approach to push. I do need to clean up the WAL's on master once they've made it to the warm_standby,
Why?
so in this new push approach, I only round up WAL's that are, say 10m
old, and then rsync those to warm_standby,
To the standby server pg_xlog or to the archive directory?
If it to the archive directory I am not following. The archive_command
is pushing the WALs to the archive directory and restore_command is
pulling it from that directory and then cleaning up. What is rsync doing
that is not already being done?
If directly, to the standby pg_xlog I do not see it ending well when two
independent processes are writing to the same directory.
deleting them on master when they've been xferred. warm_standby
continues to do a good job of cleaning up the archive dir w/o any fuss
from me.
>
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Charlton Galvarino | 2015-05-01 00:22:21 | Re: psql 8 warm standby strong start, weak finish |
Previous Message | Charlton Galvarino | 2015-04-30 20:49:00 | Re: psql 8 warm standby strong start, weak finish |