From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com |
Subject: | Re: Checkpointer on hot standby runs without looking checkpoint_segments |
Date: | 2012-06-08 14:21:04 |
Message-ID: | CA+Tgmob5BqKvE0bX9fz3BxMeUphZjycgcAWb8qzoGkX+keUmmw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 8 June 2012 14:47, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>>> ISTM that we should avoid triggering a checkpoint on the master if
>>> checkpoint_segments is less than wal_keep_segments. Such checkpoints
>>> serve no purpose because we don't actually limit and recycle the WAL
>>> files and all it does is slow people down.
>>
>> On the other hand, I emphatically disagree with this, for the same
>> reasons as on the other thread. Getting data down to disk provides a
>> greater measure of safety than having it in memory. Making
>> checkpoint_segments not force a checkpoint is no better than making
>> checkpoint_timeout not force a checkpoint.
>
> Not sure which bit you are disagreeing with. I have no suggested
> change to checkpoint_timeout.
You already made it not a hard timeout. We have another nearby thread
discussing why I don't like that.
> What I'm saying is that forcing a checkpoint to save space, when we
> aren't going to save space, makes no sense.
We are also forcing a checkpoint to limit recovery time and data loss
potential, not just to save space.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2012-06-08 14:39:31 | Re: Checkpointer on hot standby runs without looking checkpoint_segments |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2012-06-08 13:58:23 | Re: Checkpointer on hot standby runs without looking checkpoint_segments |