Re: parallelizing the archiver

From: "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: parallelizing the archiver
Date: 2021-10-27 04:10:07
Message-ID: 6F687CD9-3A24-44F4-9C23-C8779E3EEC42@amazon.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 10/25/21, 1:41 PM, "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com> wrote:
> Great. Unless I see additional feedback on the basic design shortly,
> I'll give the documentation updates a try.

Okay, here is a more complete patch with a first attempt at the
documentation changes. I tried to keep the changes to the existing
docs as minimal as possible, and then I added a new chapter that
describes what goes into creating an archive module. Separately, I
simplified the basic_archive module, moved it to src/test/modules,
and added a simple test. My goal is for this to serve as a basic
example and to provide some test coverage on the new infrastructure.

Nathan

Attachment Content-Type Size
v7-0001-Introduce-archive-module-infrastructure.patch application/octet-stream 56.1 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Nancarrow 2021-10-27 04:22:17 Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2021-10-27 04:07:46 Re: TAP test for recovery_end_command