From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Hot standby and synchronous replication status |
Date: | 2009-08-11 06:33:36 |
Message-ID: | 9837222c0908102333g4dd742ectd359761fe2964e57@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tuesday, August 11, 2009, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
> 2009/8/11 Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
>
> We should probably have a separate discussion about what the least
> committable unit would be for this patch. I wonder if it might be
> sufficient to provide a facility for streaming WAL, plus a standalone
> tool for receving it and storing it to a file. This might be designed
> as an improvement on our existing concept of an archive; the advantage
> would be that you could have all but perhaps the last few seconds of
> WAL if the primary kicked the bucket, rather than being behind by up
> to checkpoint_timeout. Allowing the WAL to be received directly by
> PostgreSQL could be a future enhancement.
> That's an interesting idea. That would essentially be another method to set up a WAL archive. I'm not sure it's worthwhile on its own, but once we have the wal-sender infrastructure in place it should be easy to write such a tool.
It most definitely would be useful on it's own. I have several
installations where we'd love such a capability.
/Magnus
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Brendan Jurd | 2009-08-11 06:46:44 | Re: WIP: to_char, support for EEEE format |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2009-08-11 05:50:46 | Re: Hot standby and synchronous replication status |