| From: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Takayuki Tsunakawa" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "ITAGAKI Takahiro" <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Load distributed checkpoint |
| Date: | 2006-12-11 09:30:57 |
| Message-ID: | 1165829458.3839.872.camel@silverbirch.site |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On Fri, 2006-12-08 at 11:05 +0900, Takayuki Tsunakawa wrote:
> I understand that checkpoints occur during crash
> recovery and PITR, so time for those operations would get longer.
A restorepoint happens during recovery, not a checkpoint. The recovery
is merely repeating the work of the checkpoint that occurred in the
original WAL stream. Elongating the checkpoint would not have any effect
on a restorepoint: we only record the checkpoint when it is complete and
we only create a restorepoint when we see the checkpoint record.
Crash recovery and PITR use almost exactly the same code path (by
design), so there isn't anything special to say about PITR either.
--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | ITAGAKI Takahiro | 2006-12-11 10:38:16 | Re: Load distributed checkpoint |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2006-12-11 09:17:37 | Re: EXPLAIN ANALYZE |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | ITAGAKI Takahiro | 2006-12-11 10:38:16 | Re: Load distributed checkpoint |
| Previous Message | Devrim GUNDUZ | 2006-12-10 22:27:31 | Re: 8.2.0 pdf |