From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Alexey Vasiliev <leopard_ne(at)inbox(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Patch: add recovery_timeout option to control timeout of restore_command nonzero status code |
Date: | 2014-11-03 19:36:33 |
Message-ID: | 5457D941.50705@gmx.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/3/14 6:04 AM, Alexey Vasiliev wrote:
> 3. What the patch does in a short paragraph: This patch should add
> option recovery_timeout, which help to control timeout of
> restore_command nonzero status code. Right now default value is 5
> seconds. This is useful, if I using for restore of wal logs some
> external storage (like AWS S3) and no matter what the slave database
> will lag behind the master. The problem, what for each request to
> AWS S3 need to pay, what is why for N nodes, which try to get next
> wal log each 5 seconds will be bigger price, than for example each
> 30 seconds.
That seems useful. I would include something about this use case in the
documentation.
> This is my first patch. I am not sure about name of option. Maybe it
> should called "recovery_nonzero_timeout".
The option name had me confused. At first I though this is the time
after which a running restore_command invocation gets killed. I think a
more precise description might be restore_command_retry_interval.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2014-11-03 19:39:30 | Re: how to handle missing "prove" |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2014-11-03 19:34:10 | Re: Let's drop two obsolete features which are bear-traps for novices |