| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Jeff Frost <jeff(at)frostconsultingllc(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [ADMIN] does wal archiving block the current client |
| Date: | 2006-05-23 15:01:01 |
| Message-ID: | 1148396461.2646.833.camel@localhost.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2006-05-23 at 10:53 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > This doesn't quite get to the nub of the problem: archiver is designed
> > to keep archiving files, even in the event that the postmaster explodes.
> > It will keep archiving until they're all gone.
>
> I think we just need a PostmasterIsAlive check in the per-file loop.
...which would mean the archiver would not outlive postmaster in the
event it crashes...which is exactly the time you want it to keep going.
Granted, that's an easy change.
--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-05-23 15:09:24 | Re: [ADMIN] does wal archiving block the current client connection? |
| Previous Message | j n | 2006-05-23 14:55:02 | Fwd: localization, encoding problem |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-05-23 15:09:24 | Re: [ADMIN] does wal archiving block the current client connection? |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2006-05-23 14:59:11 | Re: error-free disabling of individual child partition |