Re: Streaming replication and a disk full in primary

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Streaming replication and a disk full in primary
Date: 2010-04-12 13:04:49
Message-ID: p2y603c8f071004120604j94179dd6j7c2b6e687a4c5007@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 6:41 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>> Why is standby_keep_segments used even if max_wal_senders is zero?
>> In that case, ISTM we don't need to keep any WAL files in pg_xlog
>> for the standby.
>
> True. I don't think we should second guess the admin on that, though.
> Perhaps he only set max_wal_senders=0 temporarily, and will be
> disappointed if the the logs are no longer there when he sets it back to
> non-zero and restarts the server.

If archive_mode is off and max_wal_senders = 0, then the WAL that's
being generated won't be usable for streaming anyway, right?

I think this is another manifestation of the problem I was complaining
about over the weekend: there's no longer a single GUC that controls
what type of information we emit as WAL. In previous releases,
archive_mode served that function, but now it's much more complicated
and, IMHO, not very comprehensible.

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-04/msg00509.php

...Robert

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2010-04-12 13:17:56 Re: testing HS/SR - 1 vs 2 performance
Previous Message Erik Rijkers 2010-04-12 12:58:15 Re: testing HS/SR - 1 vs 2 performance