From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com |
Cc: | "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "'Joe Conway'" <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, "'Gavin Sherry'" <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>, tswan(at)idigx(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Out of space situation and WAL log pre-allocation (was |
Date: | 2004-03-03 22:28:52 |
Message-ID: | 200403032228.i23MSqn26002@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs wrote:
> User-selectable behaviour? OK. That's how we deal with fsync; I can
> relate to that. That hadn't been part of my thinking because of the
> importance I'd attached to the log files themselves, but I can go with
> that, if that's what was meant.
>
> So, if we had a parameter called Wal_archive_policy that has 3 settings:
> None = no archiving
> Optimistic = archive, but if for some reason log space runs out then
> make space by dropping the oldest archive logs
> Strict = if log space runs out, stop further write transactions from
> committing, by whatever means, even if this takes down dbms.
>
> That way, we've got something akin to transaction isolation level with
> various levels of protection.
Yep, we will definately need something like that. Basically whenever
the logs are being archived, you have to stop the database if you can't
archive, no?
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Lee Kindness | 2004-03-03 23:23:51 | Re: Thread safe connection-name mapping in ECPG. Is it |
Previous Message | Dann Corbit | 2004-03-03 22:15:47 | Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] What's left? |