Re: Decreasing WAL size effects

From: Jason Long <mailing(dot)list(at)supernovasoftware(dot)com>
To: Kyle Cordes <kyle(at)kylecordes(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Decreasing WAL size effects
Date: 2008-10-30 20:51:18
Message-ID: 490A1E46.1080107@supernovasoftware.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

Kyle Cordes wrote:
> Greg Smith wrote:
>
>> there's no chance it can accidentally look like a valid segment. But
>> when an existing segment is recycled, it gets a new header and that's
>> it--the rest of the 16MB is still left behind from whatever was in
>> that segment before. That means that even if you only write, say,
>> 1MB of new
>
> [...]
>
>> What clearxlogtail does is look inside the WAL segment, and it clears
>> the "tail" behind the portion of that is really used. So our example
>> file would end up with just the 1MB of useful data, followed by 15MB of
>
>
> It sure would be nice if there was a way for PG itself to zero the
> unused portion of logs as they are completed, perhaps this will make
> it in as part of the ideas discussed on this list a while back to make
> a more "out of the box" log-ship mechanism?
*I agree totally. I looked at the code for clearxlogtail and it seems
short and not very complex. Hopefully something like this will at least
be a trivial to set up option in 8.4.**
*
>
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Berend Tober 2008-10-30 21:05:46 Re: Schema Upgrade Howto
Previous Message Kyle Cordes 2008-10-30 20:42:59 Re: Decreasing WAL size effects

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Smith 2008-10-30 21:10:08 Re: Decreasing WAL size effects
Previous Message Kyle Cordes 2008-10-30 20:42:59 Re: Decreasing WAL size effects