| From: | Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(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 10:23:12 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTi=YZVYEb-Su+XvPWGU4YJc-O7tVOj0GOsBDOZF8@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 30 August 2010 13:14, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I think that the advantage of registering standbys is that we can
> specify which WAL files the master has to keep for the upcoming
> standby. IMO, it's usually called together with pg_start_backup
> as follows:
>
> SELECT register_standby('foo', pg_start_backup())
>
> This requests the master keep to all the WAL files following the
> backup starting location which pg_start_backup returns. Now we
> can do that by using wal_keep_segments, but it's not easy to set
> because it's difficult to predict how many WAL files the standby
> will require.
+1 I don't like the idea of having to guess how many WAL files you
think you'll need to keep around.
And if these standby instances have to register, could there be a view
to list subscriber information?
--
Thom Brown
Twitter: @darkixion
IRC (freenode): dark_ixion
Registered Linux user: #516935
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2010-09-02 10:24:05 | Re: Synchronous replication - patch status inquiry |
| Previous Message | Itagaki Takahiro | 2010-09-02 10:03:56 | Re: register/unregister standby Re: Synchronous replication |