Re: little PITR annoyance

Hi Simon,

I'll be glad to test it for you when you're ready!
Thanks for looking at this issue.

Best regards,
On Sun, 10 Jun 2007, Simon Riggs wrote:

> Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2007 23:55:32 +0100
> From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
> To: ohp(at)pyrenet(dot)fr
> Cc: pgsql-hackers list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] little PITR annoyance
>
> On Sun, 2007-06-10 at 20:48 +0200, ohp(at)pyrenet(dot)fr wrote:
> > >
> > > > My questions was: why don't we start the archiving *BEFORE* postmaster to
> > > > make room.
> > >
> > > The archiver is executed from the postmaster, so thats not possible.
> > >
> > I'm aware of that, my point is maybe the archiver doesn't need postmaster
> > to be fully operational (responding to db requests) to be started
> > > We could investigate where best to put some code, but it wouldn't be
> > > executed very frequently.
> > I agree, OTOH, the more PITR is used on big busy db to more this may
> > happend.
> > >
> > > Why not just execute the archive_command in a script, replacing
> > > the .ready with .done files in archive_status directory when its
> > > processed?
> > >
> > Sure, but if *I* can do it, why can't the system?
> >
> > What do you think,
>
> Just looked at the code. Does seem possible to start archiver earlier -
> it has no hooks into anything else and doesn't need transactions.
>
> Starting archiver earlier would not be the only change required, since
> recovery could be very short. That will take some thought on how to
> resolve.
>
> I have other things pressing on me now, but I'll add this to my todo,
> though I'll be relying on you to test it when I get round to it.
>
>

--
Olivier PRENANT Tel: +33-5-61-50-97-00 (Work)
15, Chemin des Monges +33-5-61-50-97-01 (Fax)
31190 AUTERIVE +33-6-07-63-80-64 (GSM)
FRANCE Email: ohp(at)pyrenet(dot)fr
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Make your life a dream, make your dream a reality. (St Exupery)