From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
Cc: | chenhj <chjischj(at)163(dot)com>, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH]make pg_rewind to not copy useless WAL files |
Date: | 2018-01-31 03:18:16 |
Message-ID: | 20180131031816.GA1586@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 11:36:09AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> In short, it seems really to me that we should reject the approach as
> proposed, and replace it with something that prevents the fetching of
> any WAL segments from the source server. I think that we could consider
> as well removing all WAL segments on the primary from the point WAL
> forked, as those created between the last checkpoint before WAL forked
> up to the point where WAL forked are useful anyway. But those are bonus
> points to keep a minimalistic amount of space for the rewound node as
> they finish by being recycled anyway. For those reasons I think that the
> patch should be marked as returned with feedback.
Hearing nothing and as the commit fest is coming to a close, I am
marking this patch as returned with feedback. Feel free to correct me
if you think this is not adapted.
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2018-01-31 03:29:31 | Re: Wait for parallel workers to attach |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2018-01-31 03:16:24 | Re: Wait for parallel workers to attach |