| From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jun Ishiduka <ishizuka(dot)jun(at)po(dot)ntts(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | ssinger_pg(at)sympatico(dot)ca, simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, magnus(at)hagander(dot)net, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, cedric(dot)villemain(dot)debian(at)gmail(dot)com, heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: Online base backup from the hot-standby |
| Date: | 2011-10-14 12:28:29 |
| Message-ID: | CAHGQGwFDFKWuLA-kWtsn9DPyGDWpALSm5tO_inacDQwb14vuOQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2011/10/13 Jun Ishiduka <ishizuka(dot)jun(at)po(dot)ntts(dot)co(dot)jp>:
> I updated to patch corresponded above-comments.
Thanks for updating the patch!
As I suggested in the reply to Simon, I think that the change of FPW
should be WAL-logged separately from that of HS parameters. ISTM
packing them in one WAL record makes XLogReportParameters()
quite confusing. Thought?
if (!shutdown && XLogStandbyInfoActive())
+ {
LogStandbySnapshot(&checkPoint.oldestActiveXid, &checkPoint.nextXid);
+ XLogReportParameters(REPORT_ON_BACKEND);
+ }
Why doesn't the change of FPW need to be WAL-logged when
shutdown checkpoint is performed? It's helpful to add the comment
explaining why.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-10-14 12:34:44 | Re: WALInsertLock tuning |
| Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2011-10-14 11:51:21 | Re: loss of transactions in streaming replication |