| From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jun Ishiduka <ishizuka(dot)jun(at)po(dot)ntts(dot)co(dot)jp>, ssinger_pg(at)sympatico(dot)ca, cedric(dot)villemain(dot)debian(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Online base backup from the hot-standby |
| Date: | 2011-08-18 01:43:21 |
| Message-ID: | CAHGQGwGkS94Lzq0mxGS7-4cMdDWGmqm04k79VTxWq34tPnU4Gw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 12:09 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Ugh, you're right. But then you might have problems if the state
> changes again before all backends have picked up the previous change.
Right.
> What I've thought about before is making one backend (say, bgwriter)
> store its latest value in shared memory, protected by some lock that
> would already be held at the time the value is needed. Everyone else
> uses the shared memory copy instead of relying on their local value.
Sounds reasonable.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2011-08-18 02:12:55 | Re: Online base backup from the hot-standby |
| Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2011-08-18 01:23:07 | Re: Displaying accumulated autovacuum cost |