Re: Would it be possible to have parallel archiving?

> 28 авг. 2018 г., в 14:08, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> написал(а):
>
> Greetings,
>
> * David Steele (david(at)pgmasters(dot)net <mailto:david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>) wrote:
>> On 8/28/18 8:32 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> To be clear, pgBackRest uses the .ready files in archive_status to
>> parallelize archiving but still notifies PostgreSQL of completion via
>> the archive_command mechanism. We do not modify .ready files to .done
>> directly.
>
> Right, we don't recommend mucking around with that directory of files.
> Even if that works today (which you'd need to test extensively...),
> there's no guarantee that it'll work and do what you want in the
> future...
WAL-G modifies archive_status files.
This path was chosen to limit state preserved between WAL-G runs (archiving to S3) and further push archiving performance.
Indeed, it was very hard to test. Also, this makes impossible to use two archiving system simultaneously for transit period.

Best regards, Andrey Borodin.