Re: Questions about the continuity of WAL archiving

On Tue, 12 Aug 2025 at 17:14, Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com>
wrote:

> On 8/12/25 01:24, px shi wrote:
> >
> > 1) What is the current archiving setup on the primary and why is
> > lagging?
> >
> > The archive command uses pgBackRest to archive to S3. Because it is
> > uploaded to S3, the archiving speed is slow, which has caused lagging.
> >
> > 2) Have you looked at archiving off the standby node while it is in
> > standby per:
> >
> > Yes, archiving on the standby node is disabled. Is it recommended to
> > share the WAL archive between the primary and standby nodes to avoid
> > interruptions in archiving?
>
> Given that you are using a less then capable storage solution(S3) why do
> you think pushing the WAL from the standby to S3 would perform any
> better then what is happening with the primary WAL?
>
> The solution is to use a more capable storage platform.
>

That is an interesting point you make Adrian. S3 seems quite popular for
this type of archiving. What would you suggest as a more capable (and cost
effective) storage platform?

Regards
Bob

>
> >
> > Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com
> > <mailto:adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com>> 于2025年8月8日周五 23:23写道：
> >
>
> --
> Adrian Klaver
> adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com
>
>
>