Re: Add a perl function in Cluster.pm to generate WAL

From: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz
Cc: bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com, alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org, andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Add a perl function in Cluster.pm to generate WAL
Date: 2023-06-16 04:30:21
Message-ID: 20230616.133021.167594806623150998.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Thanks for the comments.

At Fri, 16 Jun 2023 11:30:15 +0900, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote in
> > -$node_primary->safe_psql(
> > - 'postgres', "create table retain_test(a int);
> > - select pg_switch_wal();
> > - insert into retain_test values(1);
> > - checkpoint;");
> > +$node_primary->advance_wal(1);
> > +$node_primary->safe_psql('postgres', "checkpoint;");
> >
> > The original test generated some WAL after the segment switch, which
> > appears to be a significant characteristics of the test.
>
> Still it does not matter for this specific case? The logical slot has
> been already invalidated, so we don't care much about logical changes
> in WAL, do we?

The change itself doesn't seem to matter, but it seems intended to let
checkpoint trigger the removal of the last segment. However, I'm
unsure how the insert would influence this that way. If my
understanding is correct, then I'd support its removal.

regards.

--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nathan Bossart 2023-06-16 04:58:28 Re: add non-option reordering to in-tree getopt_long
Previous Message Masahiro Ikeda 2023-06-16 02:49:45 Re: Support to define custom wait events for extensions