| From: | Venkata Balaji N <nag1010(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Borodin Vladimir <root(at)simply(dot)name>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Streaming replication and WAL archive interactions |
| Date: | 2015-02-28 22:36:23 |
| Message-ID: | CAEyp7J9Hy8Q__FbGeR5skjk7d0dvLC+KLXB3JUuWrXXdJ5O+Wg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>
>
> Here's a first cut at this. It includes the changes from your
> standby_wal_archiving_v1.patch, so you get that behaviour if you set
> archive_mode='always', and the new behaviour I wanted with
> archive_mode='shared'. I wrote it on top of the other patch I posted
> recently to not archive bogus recycled WAL segments after promotion (
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/549489FA.4010304@vmware.com), but it
> seems to apply without it too.
>
> I suggest reading the documentation changes first, it hopefully explains
> pretty well how to use this. The code should work too, and comments on that
> are welcome too, but I haven't tested it much. I'll do more testing next
> week.
Patch did get applied successfully to the latest master. Can you please
rebase.
Regards,
Venkata Balaji N
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2015-02-28 23:32:45 | Re: CATUPDATE confusion? |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2015-02-28 21:47:26 | Re: CATUPDATE confusion? |