| From: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Kyle Cordes <kyle(at)kylecordes(dot)com>, pgsql <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Decreasing WAL size effects |
| Date: | 2008-10-30 21:54:01 |
| Message-ID: | 87abclbvgm.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> writes:
> Now, it would be possible to have that less sensitive archive code path zero
> things out, but you'd need to introduce a way to note when it's been done (so
> you don't do it for a segment twice) and a way to turn it off so everybody
> doesn't go through that overhead (which probably means another GUC). That's a
> bit much trouble to go through just for a feature with a fairly limited
> use-case that can easily live outside of the engine altogether.
Wouldn't it be just as good to indicate to the archive command the amount of
real data in the wal file and have it only bother copying up to that point?
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's Slony Replication support!
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christophe | 2008-10-30 21:57:58 | Re: Decreasing WAL size effects |
| Previous Message | Alan Hodgson | 2008-10-30 21:28:38 | Re: speed up restore from dump |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christophe | 2008-10-30 21:57:58 | Re: Decreasing WAL size effects |
| Previous Message | Kyle Cordes | 2008-10-30 21:16:43 | Re: Decreasing WAL size effects |