Re: Keepalive for max_standby_delay

From: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Keepalive for max_standby_delay
Date: 2010-06-03 08:56:49
Message-ID: AANLkTinAKcoyDYip7zL8Xv9STuTh5YdywSAAvQndp4iW@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 4:41 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> I don't understand why you want to use a different delay when you're
> restoring from archive vs. when you're streaming (what about existing WAL
> files found in pg_xlog, BTW?). The source of WAL shouldn't make a
> difference.

Yes. The pace of a recovery has nothing to do with that of log shipping.
So to hurry up a recovery when restoring from archive seems to be useless.

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2010-06-03 09:07:39 Re: Keepalive for max_standby_delay
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2010-06-03 08:53:20 Re: ALTER TABLE .... make constraint DEFERRABLE