Re: remove more archiving overhead

On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 10:20:27AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 6:23 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 09:55:53AM -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> > Yes. I found that a crash at an unfortunate moment can produce multiple
>> > links to the same file in pg_wal, which seemed bad independent of archival.
>> > By fixing that (i.e., switching from durable_rename_excl() to
>> > durable_rename()), we not only avoid this problem, but we also avoid trying
>> > to archive a file the server is concurrently writing. Then, after a crash,
>> > the WAL file to archive should either not exist (which is handled by the
>> > archiver) or contain the same contents as any preexisting archives.
>>
>> I moved the fix for this to a new thread [0] since I think it should be
>> back-patched. I've attached a new patch that only contains the part
>> related to reducing archiving overhead.
>
> While we're now after the feature freeze and thus this will need to
> wait for v16, it looks like a reasonable change to me.

Dang, just missed it. Thanks for taking a look.

--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com