Re: documentation for wal_retrieve_retry_interval

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: documentation for wal_retrieve_retry_interval
Date: 2015-11-23 14:25:06
Message-ID: 565321C2.8040206@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 11/19/15 11:26 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 1:33 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
>> There is no documentation what use case the new (in 9.5) parameter
>> wal_retrieve_retry_interval is for. The commit message
>> (5d2b45e3f78a85639f30431181c06d4c3221c5a1) alludes to something, but
>> even that is not clear, and obviously in the wrong place. Could we come
>> up with something more to put into the documentation?
>
> Yeah, we should highlight the facts that recovery can be made more
> responsive when attempting to detect WAL. In archive recovery, this
> can be translated by the fact that new WAL segments can be detected
> more quickly and make recovery more responsive. The opposite is
> actually what leaded to the patch: requirement was to limit the number
> of times archive host was requested with a server that had low
> activity, the archive host being on AWS.
>
> An idea would be something like the patch attached. Thoughts?

Sounds good. Thanks!

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim Nasby 2015-11-23 16:42:18 Re: [PROPOSAL] Inputs on forcing VACUUM VERBOSE to write timestamp
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2015-11-23 12:45:39 Re: [DESIGN] ParallelAppend