From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Keepalive for max_standby_delay |
Date: | 2010-06-03 09:39:48 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTinUrN_XO5dRqIaIKfEaMZPGd9IrwYwXz3-qVdvm@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 6:07 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-06-03 at 17:56 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 4:41 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
>> <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>> > I don't understand why you want to use a different delay when you're
>> > restoring from archive vs. when you're streaming (what about existing WAL
>> > files found in pg_xlog, BTW?). The source of WAL shouldn't make a
>> > difference.
>>
>> Yes. The pace of a recovery has nothing to do with that of log shipping.
>> So to hurry up a recovery when restoring from archive seems to be useless.
>
> When streaming drops for some reason we revert to scanning the archive
> for files. There is clearly two modes of operation.
Yes.
> So it makes sense
> that you might want to set different times for the parameter in each
> case.
What purpose would that serve?
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Stark | 2010-06-03 10:41:27 | Re: Idea for getting rid of VACUUM FREEZE on cold pages |
Previous Message | Takahiro Itagaki | 2010-06-03 09:38:33 | pgsql: Fix dblink to treat connection names longer than NAMEDATALEN-2 |