From: | Piotr Stefaniak <postgres(at)piotr-stefaniak(dot)me> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: recovery_target_time = 'now' is not an error but still impractical setting |
Date: | 2017-08-19 10:04:37 |
Message-ID: | DBXPR03MB3653059BCCC0F27E6E7FBEEF2810@DBXPR03MB365.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017-08-18 20:51, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 4:39 AM, Piotr Stefaniak
> <postgres(at)piotr-stefaniak(dot)me> wrote:
>> On 2017-08-17 11:24, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>> Your suggestion of "furthest" is already the default behaviour.
>>>
>>> Why are you using 'now'? Why would you want to pick a randomly
>>> selected end time?
>>
>> The idea in both cases was to stop the recovery in order to prevent the
>> standby from selecting new timeline. I want to be able to continue the
>> recovery from future WAL files. "Furthest" really meant "as far as
>> possible without completing recovery".
>
> Can you use recovery_target_action='shutdown' instead?
The thing I've tried was a combination of recovery_target_action =
'shutdown' and recovery_target_time = 'now'. Do you mean
recovery_target_action = 'shutdown' and everything else unset (default)?
That leads to the standby selecting new timeline anyway. Adding
standby_mode = on prevents that, but then there is no shutdown. Am I
missing something?
The only way I've managed to get recovery_target_action = 'shutdown' to
work as I needed was to follow advice by Matthijs and Christoph to
combine recovery_target_action with either setting recovery_target_time
to "now" spelled in the usual, non-special way or setting
recovery_target_xid to the latest transaction ID pg_xlogdump could find.
You could also try recovery_target_lsn, but I don't have that in 9.4. I
don't like that line of thought though, so for now I'll use the
restore_command hack I mentioned in the first message of this thread.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | MauMau | 2017-08-19 14:29:25 | [RFC] What would be difficult to make data models pluggable for making PostgreSQL a multi-model database? |
Previous Message | Ildar Musin | 2017-08-19 09:21:15 | Re: Proposal: global index |