| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Harris <lists(at)spuddy(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Shutting down a warm standby database in |
| Date: | 2006-11-30 20:59:15 |
| Message-ID: | 328.1164920355@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Stephen Harris <lists(at)spuddy(dot)org> writes:
> Starting up the standby database still goes back to earlier log files,
> but I guess that's the 100 checkpoint thing you mentioned earlier.
Actually I was misremembering that: the frequency of recovery
checkpoints is time-based, and for a slave that's in sync with its
master, they should occur about as often as checkpoints on the master.
So the amount of log to be replayed should be comparable to what the
master would have to replay if it crashed.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nathan Wilhelmi | 2006-11-30 21:14:41 | Data corruption problem... |
| Previous Message | Stephen Harris | 2006-11-30 20:52:23 | Re: Shutting down a warm standby database in |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2006-11-30 21:07:38 | Re: Short writes |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-11-30 20:56:21 | Re: Order of checking for readline support libraries |