| From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: WAL "low watermark" during base backup |
| Date: | 2011-09-02 18:14:26 |
| Message-ID: | CABUevExExTREsuc-j5ZLO-GbtS-k7_FnBROULdD-j=YDPww33g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 20:12, Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>> Attached patch implements a "low watermark wal location" in the
>> walsender shmem array. Setting this value in a walsender prevents
>> transaction log removal prior to this point - similar to how
>> wal_keep_segments work, except with an absolute number rather than
>> relative.
>
> cool! just a question, shouldn't we clean the value after the base
> backup has finished?
We should. Thanks, will fix!
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2011-09-02 18:15:34 | Re: pg_upgrade automatic testing |
| Previous Message | Jaime Casanova | 2011-09-02 18:12:40 | Re: WAL "low watermark" during base backup |