Re: Wait event that should be reported while waiting for WAL archiving to finish

From: Atsushi Torikoshi <atorik(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Wait event that should be reported while waiting for WAL archiving to finish
Date: 2020-03-19 10:39:33
Message-ID: CACZ0uYEhiANjq+OOE-ojFN3JExbEkBdgsTn6zw+CuB-KouEf8Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 9:19 PM Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>
wrote:

> I have no idea about this. But I wonder how much that change
> is helpful to reduce the power consumption because waiting
> for WAL archive during the backup basically not so frequently
> happens.
>

+1.
And as far as I reviewed the patch, I didn't find any problems.

Regards,

--
Atsushi Torikoshi

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rajkumar Raghuwanshi 2020-03-19 10:41:24 Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2020-03-19 10:35:41 Re: Auxiliary Processes and MyAuxProc