From: | Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | archive_timeout behaviour when archive_mode is off (was Re: Too frequent checkpoints ?) |
Date: | 2013-02-15 06:12:29 |
Message-ID: | CABOikdM1D1jtcO59MEvgPpM2A9tit5JPs2yDwqeUQENnMMEvxg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
(changing subject)
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 11:48 PM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Pavan Deolasee
>> I also noticed that the WAL file switch
>> happens after archive_timeout seconds irrespective of whether
>> archive_mode is turned ON or not. This happens because we don't check
>> if XLogArchivingActive() in CheckArchiveTimeout() function. It looks
>> wrong to me.
>
> +1 to fix this. I've not heard the use case where archive_timeout needs to
> be used even in not archive mode...
>
Ok, I will write a patch to fix this. I wonder if this is worth
backpatching though. The code is like that for a long time and the
fact that we haven't heard any complaints about it, may be its not
worth fixing in the stable branches. But I wonder if anyone else
thinks otherwise.
I think we should also update the documentation to be clear that
archive_timeout and archive_command are used only when archive_mode is
turned on.
Thanks,
Pavan
--
Pavan Deolasee
http://www.linkedin.com/in/pavandeolasee
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavan Deolasee | 2013-02-15 06:42:39 | Re: I think we need PRE_COMMIT events for (Sub)XactCallbacks |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2013-02-15 04:02:58 | Re: PATCH: Split stats file per database WAS: autovacuum stress-testing our system |