Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Streaming replication, and walsender during recovery

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Streaming replication, and walsender during recovery
Date: 2010-01-28 20:05:32
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> Hmm, I'm sorry but that's bogus. Retaining so much WAL that we are
> strongly in danger of blowing disk space is not what I would call a
> safety feature. Since there is no way to control or restrain the number
> of files for certain, that approach seems fatally flawed. Reducing
> checkpoint_timeout is the opposite of what you would want to do for
> performance.

Which WAL are we talking about here?  There's 3 copies to worry about:

1) master WAL
2) the archive copy of WAL
3) slave WAL

--Josh Berkus

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2010-01-28 20:07:59
Subject: Re: pgsql: Define INADDR_NONE on Solaris when it's missing.
Previous:From: Tim BunceDate: 2010-01-28 20:01:42
Subject: Re: Add on_trusted_init and on_untrusted_init to plperl [PATCH]

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group