| From: | Dipesh Pandit <dipesh(dot)pandit(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Hannu Krosing <hannuk(at)google(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: .ready and .done files considered harmful |
| Date: | 2021-07-06 14:38:42 |
| Message-ID: | CAN1g5_E_rjzQSrCo8VgDPyHybtrxcLkhixDiCS90RG_w=ZCu2w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> specifically about history files being given higher priority for
> archiving. If we go with this change then we'd at least want to rewrite
> or remove those comments, but I don't actually agree that we should
> remove that preference to archive history files ahead of WAL, for the
> reasons brought up previously.
> As was suggested on that subthread, it seems like it should be possible
> to just track the current timeline and adjust what we're doing if the
> timeline changes, and we should even know what the .history file is at
> that point and likely don't even need to scan the directory for it, as
> it'll be the old timeline ID.
I agree, I missed this part. The .history file should be given higher
preference.
I will take care of it in the next patch.
Thanks,
Dipesh
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | vignesh C | 2021-07-06 14:39:31 | Re: Identify missing publications from publisher while create/alter subscription. |
| Previous Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2021-07-06 14:07:33 | Re: proposal - log_full_scan |