Re: Streaming rep - why log shipping is necessary?

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: marcin mank <marcin(dot)mank(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Streaming rep - why log shipping is necessary?
Date: 2010-02-25 17:34:30
Message-ID: 4B86B4A6.1050200@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


>> If you're adventurous enough, it's actually possible to set an
>> archive_command that checks the status of the standby and returns
>> failure as long as the standby still needs the given WAL segment. That
>> way the primary doesn't recycle segments that are still needed by the
>> standby, and you can get away without restore_command in the standby.

I'd prefer something a little different ... is there any way to tell
which log segments a standby still needs, *from* the standby?

Given performance considerations, I'd prefer to set up HS/SR with log
shipping because I don't want any slaves asking the master for a really
old log and interfering with its write performance. However, that
leaves the issue of "How do I decide when I can delete archived log
segments off the slave because the slave is past them?"

Currently, I'm recommending some interval of time, but that's very brute
force and error-prone. I'd prefer some elegant way to determine "log
segment contains no unapplied transactions." Is there one?

--Josh Berkus

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jaime Casanova 2010-02-25 17:45:50 Re: tie user processes to postmaster was:(Re: [HACKERS] scheduler in core)
Previous Message Greg Smith 2010-02-25 17:31:55 Re: pg_stop_backup does not complete