Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > What I'm thinking about right now is tweaking the index-build code to
> > write to WAL only if it sees that PITR is actually in use.  It would
> > have to look at the GUC variables to determine whether WAL archiving
> > is enabled.  If archiving isn't turned on, then we could assume that
> > rollforward from a past backup isn't needed in this installation, and
> > use the WAL-less index build method.
> 
> Seems reasonable.

What happens if someone turns on archiving while the index is being
built?  Is that possible?

I assume if someone turns on archiving in postgresql.conf, sighups the
postmaster, then does a tar backup, they should be able to do archiving,
no?


-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

• Re: Fast index build vs. PITR at 2004-06-01 01:53:38 from Christopher Kings-Lynne

Responses

• Re: Fast index build vs. PITR at 2004-06-01 02:14:02 from Tom Lane

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Neil Conway	Date: 2004-06-01 02:04:23
	Subject: Re: Converting postgresql.conf parameters to kilobytes
Previous:	From: Bruce Momjian	Date: 2004-06-01 02:01:34
	Subject: Re: CVS tip problems