Re: remove more archiving overhead

On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 6:23 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 09:55:53AM -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> > Yes. I found that a crash at an unfortunate moment can produce multiple
> > links to the same file in pg_wal, which seemed bad independent of archival.
> > By fixing that (i.e., switching from durable_rename_excl() to
> > durable_rename()), we not only avoid this problem, but we also avoid trying
> > to archive a file the server is concurrently writing. Then, after a crash,
> > the WAL file to archive should either not exist (which is handled by the
> > archiver) or contain the same contents as any preexisting archives.
>
> I moved the fix for this to a new thread [0] since I think it should be
> back-patched. I've attached a new patch that only contains the part
> related to reducing archiving overhead.

While we're now after the feature freeze and thus this will need to
wait for v16, it looks like a reasonable change to me.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com