Re: remove more archiving overhead

On 2022/04/08 7:23, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 09:55:53AM -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> Yes. I found that a crash at an unfortunate moment can produce multiple
>> links to the same file in pg_wal, which seemed bad independent of archival.
>> By fixing that (i.e., switching from durable_rename_excl() to
>> durable_rename()), we not only avoid this problem, but we also avoid trying
>> to archive a file the server is concurrently writing. Then, after a crash,
>> the WAL file to archive should either not exist (which is handled by the
>> archiver) or contain the same contents as any preexisting archives.
>
> I moved the fix for this to a new thread [0] since I think it should be
> back-patched. I've attached a new patch that only contains the part
> related to reducing archiving overhead.

Thanks for updating the patch. It looks good to me.
Barring any objection, I'm thinking to commit it.

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION