| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fast promotion not used when doing a recovery_target PITR restore? |
| Date: | 2017-06-28 22:23:46 |
| Message-ID: | CAB7nPqREKUQFt++MbWzwtzedKxRnN7ZhOL1QAuXOtKLssN_8eg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 6:13 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> You seem to completely argue besides my point that the replication path
> is *more* robust by now? And there's plenty scenarios where a faster
> startup is quite crucial for performance. The difference between an
> immediate shutdown + recovery without checkpoint to a fast shutdown can
> be very large, and that matters a lot for faster postgres updates etc.
If you go that way, it seems safer to me if users had some control
with a switch, defaulting to the previous behavior. And a complete
switch to the newer behavior could be done later on depending on what
has been found.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2017-06-28 22:52:14 | Re: Race conditions with WAL sender PID lookups |
| Previous Message | Mark Rofail | 2017-06-28 21:49:16 | Re: GSoC 2017: Foreign Key Arrays |