Re: obsolete pg_receivexlog note?

On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 6:42 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
>
> On 10/20/14 2:07 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > The reference page for pg_receivexlog
> > (http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.4/static/app-pgreceivexlog.html) has
> > this note:
> >
> > """
> > When using pg_receivexlog instead of archive_command, the server will
> > continue to recycle transaction log files even if the backups are not
> > properly archived, since there is no command that fails. This can be
> > worked around by having an archive_command that fails when the file has
> > not been properly archived yet, for example:
> >
> > archive_command = 'sleep 5 && test -f /mnt/server/archivedir/%f'
> > The initial timeout is necessary because pg_receivexlog works using
> > asynchronous replication and can therefore be slightly behind the master.
> > """
> >
> > ISTM that this should be replaced with something to the effect of, if
> > you are using pg_receivexlog instead of archive_command, you had better
> > use slots.
>
> Here is a patch.

In this paragraph, is it worth mentioning as well that the tradeoff
when using replication slots is to monitor the xlog partition to be
sure it doesn't get full?
--
Michael