From: | magodo <wztdyl(at)sina(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | Postgres general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg9.6: no backup history file (*.backup) created on hot standby |
Date: | 2018-10-09 07:26:35 |
Message-ID: | ad114a387770b8f1f9903a592a4246b6f4aa9dca.camel@sina.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, 2018-10-09 at 12:53 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 11:45:50AM +0800, magodo wrote:
> > Yet, I am still not so clear how does the bloat of pg_wal happen?
> > Do
> > you mean pg_wal will be filled up by many .backup(s)?
>
> If your archive_command is for example a simple cp (which it should
> not
> be by the way), and if you try to archive twice the same file, then
> the
> archive command would continuously fail and prevent existing WAL
> segments to be archived. Segments are continuously created, and
> pg_wal
> grows in size.
> --
> Michael
Yes, but does this differ whether I'm archiving a general WAL or
archiving the backup history? I mean if user doesn't handle duplicate
archive, then pg_wal will still be filled up when archiving WAL.
Magodo
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-10-09 07:55:41 | Re: pg9.6: no backup history file (*.backup) created on hot standby |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-10-09 05:43:46 | Re: pg_dump: [archiver (db)] query failed: FATAL: semop(id=10649641) failed: Identifier removed |