From: | <furuyao(at)pm(dot)nttdata(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <teranishih(at)nttdata(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Subject: | Re: pg_receivexlog --status-interval add fsync feedback |
Date: | 2014-08-13 08:55:23 |
Message-ID: | A9C510524E235E44AE909CD4027AE196BF7C70D18E@MBX-MSG-SV03.msg.nttdata.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> I don't think that it's good idea to control that behavior by using
> --status-interval. I'm sure that there are some users who both want that
> behavior and want set the maximum interval between a feedback is sent
> back to the server because these settings are available in walreceiver.
> But your version of --status-interval doesn't allow those settings at
> all. That is, if set to -1, the maximum interval between each feedback
> cannot be set. OTOH, if set to the positive number,
> feedback-as-soon-as-fsync behavior cannot be enabled. Therefore, I'm
> thinking that it's better to introduce new separate option for that
> behavior.
Thanks for the review!
This patch was split option as you pointed out.
If -r option is specified, status packets sent to server as soon as after fsync.
Otherwise to send server status packet in the spacing of the --status-interval.
Regards,
--
Furuya Osamu
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
pg_receivexlog-fsync-feedback-v2.patch | application/octet-stream | 19.0 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | MauMau | 2014-08-13 09:14:17 | Re: proposal for 9.5: monitoring lock time for slow queries |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2014-08-13 08:07:15 | Re: WAL format and API changes (9.5) |