| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Forcing current WAL file to be archived |
| Date: | 2006-07-25 15:39:29 |
| Message-ID: | 1153841969.2592.583.camel@holly |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2006-07-25 at 11:20 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > > Where are we on these TODO items:
> >
> > > o Allow point-in-time recovery to archive partially filled
> > > write-ahead logs [pitr]
> >
> > I believe we'd agreed that the necessary infrastructure for this is
> > just a function to tell the current WAL segment name and offset.
>
> Yes, perhaps, though I can envision a GUC that does regularly partial
> archiving. I will add a question mark to the item.
I was planning to add a new GUC
archive_timeout (integer) = max # secs between log file switches
--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hannu Krosing | 2006-07-25 15:40:28 | Re: Better name/syntax for "online" index creation |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2006-07-25 15:37:22 | Re: Forcing current WAL file to be archived |