Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints

From: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints
Date: 2021-06-16 07:52:12
Message-ID: CAFiTN-twdCWcUaMp_+15HFFL6LgUrjss0bVyh3M8ay=n9FD6xQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 7:01 PM Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
>
> Rather than use size, I'd be inclined to say use this if the source
> database is marked as a template, and use the copydir approach for
> anything that isn't.

Yeah, that is possible, on the other thought wouldn't it be good to
provide control to the user by providing two different commands, e.g.
COPY DATABASE for the existing method (copydir) and CREATE DATABASE
for the new method (fully wal logged)?

--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fabien COELHO 2021-06-16 07:59:39 Re: Error on pgbench logs
Previous Message Masahiko Sawada 2021-06-16 07:52:11 Re: detailed error message of pg_waldump