| From: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Mahendra Singh Thalor <mahi6run(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Asim R P <apraveen(at)pivotal(dot)io>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Konstantin Knizhnik <knizhnik(at)garret(dot)ru>, Hao Wu <hawu(at)pivotal(dot)io> |
| Subject: | Re: Replication & recovery_min_apply_delay |
| Date: | 2021-11-14 06:14:38 |
| Message-ID: | CAFiTN-vzbcSM_qZ+-mhS3OWecxupDCR5DkhQUTy+TKfrCMQLKQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 1:01 AM Mahendra Singh Thalor
<mahi6run(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
I was going through and patch and trying to understand the idea that
what we are trying to achieve here. So basically, generally we start
the WAL receiver when we want to fetch the WAL, but if the user has
set the parameter WAL_RCV_START_AT_CONSISTENCY then we will start
fetching the WAL using walreciver in advance. IMHO the benefit of
this idea is that with the GUC we can control whether the extra WAL
will be collected at the primary or at the standby node right?
One problem is that if the currentsource is XLOG_FROM_ARCHIVE then we
might fetch the WAL using both walreceiver as well as from archive
right? because we are not changing the currentsource. Is this
intentional or do we want to change the currentsource as well?
--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2021-11-14 09:49:46 | Re: make update-po problem with USE_PGXS |
| Previous Message | Japin Li | 2021-11-14 02:33:19 | Re: Inconsistent error message for varchar(n) |