| From: | Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Joshua Tolley <eggyknap(at)gmail(dot)com>, Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga(at)gmail(dot)com>, Aidan Van Dyk <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: register/unregister standby Re: Synchronous replication |
| Date: | 2010-09-02 10:54:52 |
| Message-ID: | 87eidcxvnn.fsf@hi-media-techno.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> http://github.com/dimitri/pg_basebackup
>>
>>> There's been some talk of being able to stream a base backup over the
>>> replication connection too, which would be extremely handy.
>>
>> Yes please ! :)
>
> One issue of the base backup function is that the operation will
> be a long transaction. So, non-transactional special commands,
> as like as VACUUM, would be better in terms of performance.
> For example, CREATE or ALTER REPLICATION.
Well, you still need to stream the data to the client in a format it
will understand. Would that be the plan of your command proposal?
> Of course, function-based approach is more flexible and
> less invasive to the SQL parser. There are trade-offs.
Well that was easier for a proof-of-concept at least.
--
Dimitri Fontaine
PostgreSQL DBA, Architecte
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Itagaki Takahiro | 2010-09-02 11:10:33 | Re: register/unregister standby Re: Synchronous replication |
| Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2010-09-02 10:24:05 | Re: Synchronous replication - patch status inquiry |